Glen Erin Pipe Band Auld Lang Syne/Amazing Grace
That's your lot for 2008. No more posts until next year. I wish you all A Happy New Year.
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
Site Meter
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
European Court blocks UK handover of Iraqi detainees
European Court blocks UK handover of Iraqi detainees
By Geoff Meade in Brussels
Wednesday, 31 December 2008
The European Court of Human Rights blocked the handover to the Iraqi authorities of the last two remaining prisoners held by British forces in Basra yesterday– just hours after the Court of Appeal in London ruled that they could be transferred.
The two Iraqi nationals, Faisal al-Saadoon, 56, and Khalaf Mufdhi, 58, are accused of the murder in Iraq of two British soldiers. The UK authorities want to transfer them from British custody there to Iraqi custody, for trial by the Iraqi High Tribunal.
But the men claim that would violate their human rights because of the risk they could face torture, an unfair trial and the death penalty in Iraqi custody.
The last-minute injunction from Strasbourg means that another appeal will have to be heard before the fate of the pair is decided.
Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers, a civil rights group opposing the transfer, said "a further appeal of this important case is now possible in 2009 despite the expiry of the UN Mandate on 31 December 2008."
UPDATE: UK ignores ECtHR decision
By Geoff Meade in Brussels
Wednesday, 31 December 2008
The European Court of Human Rights blocked the handover to the Iraqi authorities of the last two remaining prisoners held by British forces in Basra yesterday– just hours after the Court of Appeal in London ruled that they could be transferred.
The two Iraqi nationals, Faisal al-Saadoon, 56, and Khalaf Mufdhi, 58, are accused of the murder in Iraq of two British soldiers. The UK authorities want to transfer them from British custody there to Iraqi custody, for trial by the Iraqi High Tribunal.
But the men claim that would violate their human rights because of the risk they could face torture, an unfair trial and the death penalty in Iraqi custody.
The last-minute injunction from Strasbourg means that another appeal will have to be heard before the fate of the pair is decided.
Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers, a civil rights group opposing the transfer, said "a further appeal of this important case is now possible in 2009 despite the expiry of the UN Mandate on 31 December 2008."
UPDATE: UK ignores ECtHR decision
Prisoner sues after pet parrot dies
Prisoner sues after pet parrot dies
A dead parrot named Freddy is the focus of a US lawsuit after his ex-con owner claimed prison guards denied him a phone call that would have saved the bird's life.
Thomas Goodrich is seeking a total of $500,000 (£347,000) in punitive damages from the Delaware Department of Correction Commissioner and a warden at the correctional institution where he was held for 12 days over an outstanding arrest warrant and an expired driving licence.
The 48-year-old claimed he was denied any contact with the outside world, meaning he was unable to contact a friend to feed Freddie, a £15,000 gold and blue macaw which had been his beloved pet for 20 years.
A dead parrot named Freddy is the focus of a US lawsuit after his ex-con owner claimed prison guards denied him a phone call that would have saved the bird's life.
Thomas Goodrich is seeking a total of $500,000 (£347,000) in punitive damages from the Delaware Department of Correction Commissioner and a warden at the correctional institution where he was held for 12 days over an outstanding arrest warrant and an expired driving licence.
The 48-year-old claimed he was denied any contact with the outside world, meaning he was unable to contact a friend to feed Freddie, a £15,000 gold and blue macaw which had been his beloved pet for 20 years.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Jailhouselawyer shows off his new toy
Jailhouselawyer shows off his new toy
In my view, the video quality is very good. I agree with the reviewer below that the one touch YouTube upload is a load of bollocks. Even if it was as simple as JVC claim, a big downside is that this short 3 minutes and 10 seconds film took a whopping 90 minutes to upload to YouTube! The facility provided on the software by PowerCinema for the one touch upload to YouTube does not work.
Review: JVC Everio GZ-MS100 with YouTube Upload
In my view, the video quality is very good. I agree with the reviewer below that the one touch YouTube upload is a load of bollocks. Even if it was as simple as JVC claim, a big downside is that this short 3 minutes and 10 seconds film took a whopping 90 minutes to upload to YouTube! The facility provided on the software by PowerCinema for the one touch upload to YouTube does not work.
Review: JVC Everio GZ-MS100 with YouTube Upload
Israel guilty of war crimes after declaring war on 5 innocent sisters
Israel guilty of war crimes after declaring war on 5 innocent sisters
Five sisters killed while they slept
Israel's target was the mosque next door. But the rocket attack claimed the lives of innocent children
Five sisters killed while they slept
Israel's target was the mosque next door. But the rocket attack claimed the lives of innocent children
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Battle of the Titans
Battle of the Titans
In the face of opposition from experts the British government may be reconsidering its plan to build three large new prisons
Jacqui Smith's recent announcement that proposals for direct elections to police authorities have been dropped is a rare example of consultation really making a difference. The British government is often accused of ignoring the results of its own consultations as it pushes on with policies regardless. But in this case the Home Office appears to have taken on board the concerns raised by the police and local councils and recognised that a U-turn, however embarrassing, was the right course of action.
So, if this approach is being followed over at the Ministry of Justice, can we expect a similar volte-face on Titan prisons? In a recent letter, David Hanson, the minister for prisons, announced that the government's response to its consultation on Titan prisons, which had previously been expected in November, would now be delayed until the end of the financial year. This, he explained, would give the government more time to consider the consultation responses it had received.
In the face of opposition from experts the British government may be reconsidering its plan to build three large new prisons
Jacqui Smith's recent announcement that proposals for direct elections to police authorities have been dropped is a rare example of consultation really making a difference. The British government is often accused of ignoring the results of its own consultations as it pushes on with policies regardless. But in this case the Home Office appears to have taken on board the concerns raised by the police and local councils and recognised that a U-turn, however embarrassing, was the right course of action.
So, if this approach is being followed over at the Ministry of Justice, can we expect a similar volte-face on Titan prisons? In a recent letter, David Hanson, the minister for prisons, announced that the government's response to its consultation on Titan prisons, which had previously been expected in November, would now be delayed until the end of the financial year. This, he explained, would give the government more time to consider the consultation responses it had received.
Pine martens return to England and Wales
Pine martens return to England and Wales
Pine martens have returned to England and Wales nearly 15 years after they were officially declared extinct in those countries.
Back in 2005 I was up on the North Yorkshire Moors, Close to the Cleveland Way, and I thought it was a young pine marten chasing a baby rabbit. Rocky killed them both. On reflection, perhaps it was a weasel or a stoat. First Rocky got the predator and then the prey. Later he worried a sheep. Now his hunting instincts are more under control, but he still likes to give the grey squirrels a run for their money in the local park.
Pine martens have returned to England and Wales nearly 15 years after they were officially declared extinct in those countries.
Back in 2005 I was up on the North Yorkshire Moors, Close to the Cleveland Way, and I thought it was a young pine marten chasing a baby rabbit. Rocky killed them both. On reflection, perhaps it was a weasel or a stoat. First Rocky got the predator and then the prey. Later he worried a sheep. Now his hunting instincts are more under control, but he still likes to give the grey squirrels a run for their money in the local park.
Friday, December 26, 2008
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
A very merry Christmas to all my readers
A very merry Christmas to all my readers
I will leave you with this until after the holidays.
UPDATE:
Blogger RonKnee, his wife Jane, and two of their three children, Adam and Alice (Lisa preferred to stay at home with her boyfriend), turned up in the early afternoon and stayed until the early evening. Then Viktors popped in and stayed until Christmas Day dawned.
The video was shot in between the guests coming and going.
On Christmas Morning, Rocky and I opened our presents which you can see under the Christmas tree. Every year Rocky has the habit of wagging his tail and knocking a shower of pine needles off the tree.
I will leave you with this until after the holidays.
UPDATE:
Blogger RonKnee, his wife Jane, and two of their three children, Adam and Alice (Lisa preferred to stay at home with her boyfriend), turned up in the early afternoon and stayed until the early evening. Then Viktors popped in and stayed until Christmas Day dawned.
The video was shot in between the guests coming and going.
On Christmas Morning, Rocky and I opened our presents which you can see under the Christmas tree. Every year Rocky has the habit of wagging his tail and knocking a shower of pine needles off the tree.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Why is Lord Ahmed not being prosecuted to the full extent of the law?
Why is Lord Ahmed not being prosecuted to the full extent of the law?
BRITAIN’S first Muslim peer Lord Ahmed faces a jail sentence after texting on his mobile phone moments before crashing into a car and killing the driver.
This case stinks to high heaven.
Lord Ahmed of Rotherham, 51, was told that although he was blameless over the accident, he was still guilty of “prolonged dangerous driving”.
Blameless? He was driving in the outside lane on the motorway and texting immediately prior to the crash in which he caused the death of another driver. Firstly, he should not have been texting but instead have his eyes on the road ahead. Secondly, he should not have been in the outside lane hogging it as there were two other lanes free of traffic. He could have avoided the crash either by not texting, being in one of the other two lanes or looking where he was going and breaking in time.
The cheeky bastard! "Lord Ahmed had hoped for just a fine after admitting dangerous driving at an earlier hearing".
WTF! Has this got to do with anything? "The court heard he was so involved in denouncing terror, a “fatwa” death sentence had been issued against him by Muslim radicals". He gave the other driver a death sentence by his causing death by dangerous driving. The law works in mysterious ways. Lord Ahmed was not charged with the appropriate charge. Rather, he was only charged with dangerous driving. Perhaps, the other driver committed suicide? Still, assisting suicide is a criminal offence...
Related content...
Text-death driver has appeal rejected
A LORRY driver who killed a man after crashing into the back of his tractor while keying explicit text messages into his phone has failed to convince top judges his six-year jail term was too harsh.
One of the judges in the above case is none other than Mr Justice Tugendhat, who has recently ordered Guido not to mention the Court Order gagging him which was obtained by those dodgy solicitors Carter Fuck.
BRITAIN’S first Muslim peer Lord Ahmed faces a jail sentence after texting on his mobile phone moments before crashing into a car and killing the driver.
This case stinks to high heaven.
Lord Ahmed of Rotherham, 51, was told that although he was blameless over the accident, he was still guilty of “prolonged dangerous driving”.
Blameless? He was driving in the outside lane on the motorway and texting immediately prior to the crash in which he caused the death of another driver. Firstly, he should not have been texting but instead have his eyes on the road ahead. Secondly, he should not have been in the outside lane hogging it as there were two other lanes free of traffic. He could have avoided the crash either by not texting, being in one of the other two lanes or looking where he was going and breaking in time.
The cheeky bastard! "Lord Ahmed had hoped for just a fine after admitting dangerous driving at an earlier hearing".
WTF! Has this got to do with anything? "The court heard he was so involved in denouncing terror, a “fatwa” death sentence had been issued against him by Muslim radicals". He gave the other driver a death sentence by his causing death by dangerous driving. The law works in mysterious ways. Lord Ahmed was not charged with the appropriate charge. Rather, he was only charged with dangerous driving. Perhaps, the other driver committed suicide? Still, assisting suicide is a criminal offence...
Related content...
Text-death driver has appeal rejected
A LORRY driver who killed a man after crashing into the back of his tractor while keying explicit text messages into his phone has failed to convince top judges his six-year jail term was too harsh.
One of the judges in the above case is none other than Mr Justice Tugendhat, who has recently ordered Guido not to mention the Court Order gagging him which was obtained by those dodgy solicitors Carter Fuck.
Guantánamo: Robert Gates accused of perjury over torture
Guantánamo: Robert Gates accused of perjury over torture
Lawyers for a British resident held at Guantánamo Bay have accused Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, of signing a "flagrantly false" affidavit to avoid having to disclose evidence of torture.
And on a similar theme...
Turning a blind eye to war crimes
The US torture policy approved by George Bush and Dick Cheney should spark a public outcry. So where's the outrage?
Lawyers for a British resident held at Guantánamo Bay have accused Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, of signing a "flagrantly false" affidavit to avoid having to disclose evidence of torture.
And on a similar theme...
Turning a blind eye to war crimes
The US torture policy approved by George Bush and Dick Cheney should spark a public outcry. So where's the outrage?
Lunching with the ghosts of Devil's Island
A nut climed into Knut's enclosure to keep the polar bear company
A nut climed into Knut's enclosure Ato keep the polar bear company
A man who climbed into the enclosure of Knut the polar bear on Monday escaped unharmed after zookeepers distracted Berlin's celebrity bear with a piece of meat, police said.
A man who climbed into the enclosure of Knut the polar bear on Monday escaped unharmed after zookeepers distracted Berlin's celebrity bear with a piece of meat, police said.
Christmas survival guide: Pets
Christmas survival guide: Pets
Our panel of experts advises on how to cope with pets, family, eating and indulgence so that everyone can enjoy the festivities.
Whatever, I just thought it was a cute puppy photo.
Our panel of experts advises on how to cope with pets, family, eating and indulgence so that everyone can enjoy the festivities.
Whatever, I just thought it was a cute puppy photo.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Fan's fate is agonising dilemma for Straw
Fan's fate is agonising dilemma for Straw
I do not know whether or not Michael Shields was guilty of the crime for which he was convicted by a Bulgarian court in 2005. But I am sure that should the justice secretary, Jack Straw, grant him a pardon, the consequences for many prisoners currently in foreign jails could be severe.
I do not know whether or not Michael Shields was guilty of the crime for which he was convicted by a Bulgarian court in 2005. But I am sure that should the justice secretary, Jack Straw, grant him a pardon, the consequences for many prisoners currently in foreign jails could be severe.
Hen harriers in danger of becoming extinct
Hen harriers in danger of becoming extinct
Hen harriers being persecuted to edge of extinction on grouse moors
Hen harriers being persecuted to edge of extinction on grouse moors
Girl 8 refused a divorce
Girl 8 refused a divorce
There is something quite shocking about a 8 year old girl being married off by her father, without her knowledge, to pay off a debt. To add insult to injury, under Sharia law, a court has decided not to annul the marriage until the girl reaches puberty. I am assuming that the reason for this is that by that time she can make up her own mind and file for divorce. This being the case, it would appear that at 8 she is old enough to be forced into marriage but not yet old enough to say "no".
There is something quite shocking about a 8 year old girl being married off by her father, without her knowledge, to pay off a debt. To add insult to injury, under Sharia law, a court has decided not to annul the marriage until the girl reaches puberty. I am assuming that the reason for this is that by that time she can make up her own mind and file for divorce. This being the case, it would appear that at 8 she is old enough to be forced into marriage but not yet old enough to say "no".
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Exclusive: Jacqui Smith commits bigamy
Exclusive: Jacqui Smith commits bigamy
The Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, who is married to politics and has been since 1997, has committed bigamy it can be revealed. She is still married to Richard Timney having tied the knot 10 years earlier.
Mystery surrounds why Mrs Timney prefers to be known as Ms Smith, who is definitely not a spinster of this parish. Apparently, this liaison was discovered when Richard Timney wrote to the Redditch Advertiser praising Jacqui Smith. It is not clear when the men in the white coats are coming to take him away, ha, ha!
The Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, who is married to politics and has been since 1997, has committed bigamy it can be revealed. She is still married to Richard Timney having tied the knot 10 years earlier.
Mystery surrounds why Mrs Timney prefers to be known as Ms Smith, who is definitely not a spinster of this parish. Apparently, this liaison was discovered when Richard Timney wrote to the Redditch Advertiser praising Jacqui Smith. It is not clear when the men in the white coats are coming to take him away, ha, ha!
Christmas
Christmas
Christmas 1
YouTube version videoed on my mobile phone. There is a loss of picture quality but does have the added feature of a John Lennon soundtrack So This is Christmas...
Christmas 1
YouTube version videoed on my mobile phone. There is a loss of picture quality but does have the added feature of a John Lennon soundtrack So This is Christmas...
Thousands of criminals spared prison go on to offend again
Thousands of criminals spared prison go on to offend again
More than 21,000 offenders serving non-custodial sentences committed further crimes last year, casting doubt over Labour's pledge to make the punishments a tough alternative to jail.
Official figures reveal that a record number of criminals handed community orders are being thrown off the programmes because they are convicted of new offences or break the rules.
It does appear somewhat to defeat the purpose of supervision orders if the supervision by the authorities is lacking.
More than 21,000 offenders serving non-custodial sentences committed further crimes last year, casting doubt over Labour's pledge to make the punishments a tough alternative to jail.
Official figures reveal that a record number of criminals handed community orders are being thrown off the programmes because they are convicted of new offences or break the rules.
It does appear somewhat to defeat the purpose of supervision orders if the supervision by the authorities is lacking.
Mother flees abroad with her son to escape social workers
Mother flees abroad with her son to escape social workers
Social workers have been accused of trying to seize a six-year-old boy from his mother despite having no evidence that she has ever harmed him.
The 33-year-old woman fled to Ireland with her son in a bid to prevent social services taking him back into care. The British authorities maintain the boy suffered "emotional harm" while witnessing his father's violent rages against the mother and needs to be placed with a foster family.
But his mother, who has separated from the father, says social workers have never argued that she posed a danger to him and therefore have no case against her.
Isn't it typical? When the Social Services should be getting involved like in Baby P's case, there is a marked absence. When they shouldn't get involved, save for restraining the father, they make their presence felt only causing more distress to the mother and the child!
Social workers have been accused of trying to seize a six-year-old boy from his mother despite having no evidence that she has ever harmed him.
The 33-year-old woman fled to Ireland with her son in a bid to prevent social services taking him back into care. The British authorities maintain the boy suffered "emotional harm" while witnessing his father's violent rages against the mother and needs to be placed with a foster family.
But his mother, who has separated from the father, says social workers have never argued that she posed a danger to him and therefore have no case against her.
Isn't it typical? When the Social Services should be getting involved like in Baby P's case, there is a marked absence. When they shouldn't get involved, save for restraining the father, they make their presence felt only causing more distress to the mother and the child!
Saturday, December 20, 2008
More than 300 lifers out within ten years
More than 300 lifers out within ten years
More than 300 murderers, rapists and other serious offenders handed life sentences under Labour are already back on the streets.
A total of 304 of the country's most dangerous criminals, jailed since January 1997, served less than ten years despite being handed the maximum term, the Ministry of Justice has admitted.
It means courts set a minimum tariff of less than ten years for most and the Parole Board, which decides if a lifer if safe to return to the community, released them.
"A total of 304 of the country's most dangerous criminals". I am not disputing the figure of 304, that is probably accurate. However, what I do dispute is the wrongful assumption by the Telegraph's home affairs editor that the prisoners fit into the "most dangerous" category. Furthermore, I challenge the Telegraph to back up its claim that they are the most dangerous, and that the Ministry of Justice has admitted that the 304 are in fact the most dangerous criminals in the country.
I don't believe that anyone is dangerous. Rather, I believe it is the situation which is dangerous. But even accepting that such a concept as a dangerous criminal is valid, offenders are subjected to risk assessments to see what is the perceived level of risk each offender may pose to the public. Just because someone has committed a serious offence does not automatically mean that they are dangerous.
True, Labour has created this problem with its legislation of automatic life sentences and three strikes and you're out. Whilst it binds the court to pass a life sentence, judges retain the power to impose a tariff which is the sentence they would have passed but for the legislation. For example, an offender caught three times stealing a box of chocolates from Woolworths will get a life sentence. The judge may think that it only warrants a three year prison sentence and imposes a three year tariff within the life sentence. Therefore, it is not even a genuine life sentence but instead a political one imposed to make the government seem tough on crime and criminals. The real sentence is the three years tariff.
What we have here is first the dishonesty of the government followed by second the dishonest reporting in the Telegraph.
More than 300 murderers, rapists and other serious offenders handed life sentences under Labour are already back on the streets.
A total of 304 of the country's most dangerous criminals, jailed since January 1997, served less than ten years despite being handed the maximum term, the Ministry of Justice has admitted.
It means courts set a minimum tariff of less than ten years for most and the Parole Board, which decides if a lifer if safe to return to the community, released them.
"A total of 304 of the country's most dangerous criminals". I am not disputing the figure of 304, that is probably accurate. However, what I do dispute is the wrongful assumption by the Telegraph's home affairs editor that the prisoners fit into the "most dangerous" category. Furthermore, I challenge the Telegraph to back up its claim that they are the most dangerous, and that the Ministry of Justice has admitted that the 304 are in fact the most dangerous criminals in the country.
I don't believe that anyone is dangerous. Rather, I believe it is the situation which is dangerous. But even accepting that such a concept as a dangerous criminal is valid, offenders are subjected to risk assessments to see what is the perceived level of risk each offender may pose to the public. Just because someone has committed a serious offence does not automatically mean that they are dangerous.
True, Labour has created this problem with its legislation of automatic life sentences and three strikes and you're out. Whilst it binds the court to pass a life sentence, judges retain the power to impose a tariff which is the sentence they would have passed but for the legislation. For example, an offender caught three times stealing a box of chocolates from Woolworths will get a life sentence. The judge may think that it only warrants a three year prison sentence and imposes a three year tariff within the life sentence. Therefore, it is not even a genuine life sentence but instead a political one imposed to make the government seem tough on crime and criminals. The real sentence is the three years tariff.
What we have here is first the dishonesty of the government followed by second the dishonest reporting in the Telegraph.
One law for the common people and one law for a peer of the realm
One law for the common people and one law for a peer of the realm
Texting crash motorist convicted
A motorist has been found guilty of killing another driver after using her mobile phone to send and receive more than 20 text messages.
Given the above case, perhaps someone in the CPS would like to explain why Lord Ahmed is being treated differently under the law? In both cases the driver killed someone else whilst texting and driving. One is charged with causing death by dangerous driving, the other simply charged with dangerous driving. Why should a Labour peer get preferential treatment?
Texting crash motorist convicted
A motorist has been found guilty of killing another driver after using her mobile phone to send and receive more than 20 text messages.
Given the above case, perhaps someone in the CPS would like to explain why Lord Ahmed is being treated differently under the law? In both cases the driver killed someone else whilst texting and driving. One is charged with causing death by dangerous driving, the other simply charged with dangerous driving. Why should a Labour peer get preferential treatment?
Friday, December 19, 2008
Pentagon draws up plans for Guantanamo closure
Pentagon draws up plans for Guantanamo closure
US Defence Secretary Robert Gates has ordered aides to prepare a plan for closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay, in expectation that Mr Obama will take action soon after moving into the White House next month.
A Pentagon spokesman said Mr Gates was anticipating orders to shut down the base, in keeping with promises made by President-Elect Barack Obama during his election campaign.
"The request has been made, his team is working on it so he can be prepared to assist the president-elect should he wish to address this very early in his tenure," said Geoff Morrell, the spokesman.
Opened in 2002, the prison has long been a stain on America's reputation for human rights and fairness. But closing it will entail numerous difficulties.
Mr Obama's likely first step will be suspending the military trials set up by George W Bush, which have been widely criticized for their lack of judicial rigour.
A new court would then have to be created on the US mainland for up to 80 terror suspects the Pentagon has yet to put on trial at the US naval base in Cuba.
They would almost certainly include five detainees charged in relation to the September 11 attacks, whose trial has yet to start in earnest.
Another 120 inmates have been cleared for release, but have not been accepted by their home countries or neutral countries.
Tory peer accused of going berserk in road rage attack
Tory peer accused of going berserk in road rage attack
A multi-millionaire peer who built the DFS furniture chain attacked a motorist by scratching at his face and pushing his thumbs into his eyes, a jury was told yesterday.
Lord Kirkham, the founder and executive chairman of the company, is accused of carrying out the attack in the village of Sprotbrough, South Yorkshire, where he lives.
Prisoners to record bedtime stories for children
Prisoners to record bedtime stories for children
Prisoners will soon be able to video themselves reading bedtime stories to send home to their children.
The pilot scheme, called Storybook Dads, was unveiled as the ribbon was cut on the refurbished library at Saughton Prison in Edinburgh.
The new facilities will allow fathers to be recorded on DVD reading stories which will then be sent home to help them "bond" with their children. If successful the scheme could be extended to other jails.
The initiative follows criticism earlier this month of the new Addiewell Prison in West Lothian, where inmates have en suite cells with flat screen televisions and can order their meals in advance.
The library at Saughton has also been supplied with laptops, a wider range of books and for the first time has a trained librarian to help inmates get the most out of the facility.
Prisoners will soon be able to video themselves reading bedtime stories to send home to their children.
The pilot scheme, called Storybook Dads, was unveiled as the ribbon was cut on the refurbished library at Saughton Prison in Edinburgh.
The new facilities will allow fathers to be recorded on DVD reading stories which will then be sent home to help them "bond" with their children. If successful the scheme could be extended to other jails.
The initiative follows criticism earlier this month of the new Addiewell Prison in West Lothian, where inmates have en suite cells with flat screen televisions and can order their meals in advance.
The library at Saughton has also been supplied with laptops, a wider range of books and for the first time has a trained librarian to help inmates get the most out of the facility.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Cigarette chewing dog killed on way to tobacconists
Cigarette chewing dog killed on way to tobacconists
A 10-a-day cigarette chewing 24-year-old Dachshund has been knocked down and killed – on his way to the tobacconist's shop.
General Edi has been munching his way through half a packet of cigarettes every day since he was a puppy, said owner Wolfgang Treirler.
But Edi has died after he was hit by a car during a walk to his favourite cigarette shop.
"Poor Edi dashed out in the road in excitement right in front of a car.
There was nothing anyone could do," said one neighbour in Graz, central Austria.
Mr Treirler said:"His old owner abandoned him and so we took him in 17 years ago, and noticed straight away that he was in the habit of eating cigarettes.
"He eats the tobacco and the paper, and then chews a while on the filter before spitting it out.
"On average he eats about 10 cigarettes a day, but all of his teeth are fine."
A local vet, Harald Mayr, said: "Nicotine normally leads to poisoning in dogs, but in this case the animal has obviously become addicted to it which has increased its level of tolerance".
If that's not wuff justice I don't know what is! Why are smokers being targeted?
A 10-a-day cigarette chewing 24-year-old Dachshund has been knocked down and killed – on his way to the tobacconist's shop.
General Edi has been munching his way through half a packet of cigarettes every day since he was a puppy, said owner Wolfgang Treirler.
But Edi has died after he was hit by a car during a walk to his favourite cigarette shop.
"Poor Edi dashed out in the road in excitement right in front of a car.
There was nothing anyone could do," said one neighbour in Graz, central Austria.
Mr Treirler said:"His old owner abandoned him and so we took him in 17 years ago, and noticed straight away that he was in the habit of eating cigarettes.
"He eats the tobacco and the paper, and then chews a while on the filter before spitting it out.
"On average he eats about 10 cigarettes a day, but all of his teeth are fine."
A local vet, Harald Mayr, said: "Nicotine normally leads to poisoning in dogs, but in this case the animal has obviously become addicted to it which has increased its level of tolerance".
If that's not wuff justice I don't know what is! Why are smokers being targeted?
TV licence fee costs more than fine for evading payment
TV licence fee costs more than fine for evading payment
Law-abiding viewers are being charged more for their annual television licence than the average fine issued in the magistrates' courts to those who evade payment.
As the campaign against the licence fee grows, figures released by the Government reveal that 120,955 people were found guilty of evasion last year.
Of these, just two were given the maximum fine of £1,000. The average penalty was a fine of £137 - £2.50 less than the cost of the television licence itself.
Christopher Chope, Conservative MP for Christchurch, who has introduced a private member's bill calling for the abolition of the television licence, said the figures, released in a written Parliamentary answer by the Ministry of Justice, could mark the final "nail the coffin" for the universal permit.
Those fined still have to pay the TV licence fee in addition. Unless, like me, the prosecution offered no evidence and a not guilty verdict is entered. I still deny the TV Licencing authorities access to my property.
Law-abiding viewers are being charged more for their annual television licence than the average fine issued in the magistrates' courts to those who evade payment.
As the campaign against the licence fee grows, figures released by the Government reveal that 120,955 people were found guilty of evasion last year.
Of these, just two were given the maximum fine of £1,000. The average penalty was a fine of £137 - £2.50 less than the cost of the television licence itself.
Christopher Chope, Conservative MP for Christchurch, who has introduced a private member's bill calling for the abolition of the television licence, said the figures, released in a written Parliamentary answer by the Ministry of Justice, could mark the final "nail the coffin" for the universal permit.
Those fined still have to pay the TV licence fee in addition. Unless, like me, the prosecution offered no evidence and a not guilty verdict is entered. I still deny the TV Licencing authorities access to my property.
Hong Kong ruling on prisoner voting rights is part of the modern liberal trend
Hong Kong ruling on prisoner voting rights is part of the modern liberal trend
11:20 AM ET
Pui-yin Lo [Deputy Chairman, Special Committee on Constitutional Affairs and Human Rights, Hong Kong Bar Association]: "The judgment of Mr. Justice Andrew Cheung of the Hong Kong Court of First Instance on December 8, 2008, held that:
"the disenfranchisement provisions relating to voting and registration contravene the right to vote constitutionally guaranteed under article 26 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and article 21 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights, so far as they affect prisoners (and those convicted persons who have been sentenced to...imprisonment, and who have not served the sentences or received a free pardon)"
It was not unexpected. The court was assisted in reaching the ruling by jurisprudence on the same topic of the top national courts in Australia, Canada and South Africa, as well as the European Court of Human Rights. Reference was also made to the modern trend towards more liberal treatment of prisoners in terms of voting rights noted in the ACLU's 2006 analysis of "felony disenfranchisement" of various jurisdictions around the globe.
Given that the sweeping disenfranchisement provisions in Hong Kong cover a significant portion of the prison population that are serving a term of imprisonment of 6 months or less, and disable a person's right to vote so long as she is serving a term of imprisonment on election day - taking no account of the expected date of release of a prisoner - cannot be justified under the proportionality test for determining whether they constitute an unreasonable restriction to the important political right of voting. The position of persons remanded in custody pending trial is even more clear: Their right to vote is not affected by the disenfranchisement provisions, but they cannot exercise their right because of lack of access to a polling booth.
The sad fact coming out of this judgment is that it disclosed inertia on the part of executive authorities, the statutory Electoral Affairs Commission that oversees elections, as well as the legislature in addressing the topic, even though electoral legislation in Hong Kong had been frequently amended in the last few decades to take account of the development of the political system. It will take strategic litigation by prisoners assisted by NGOs as well as publicly funded legal aid to put the topic squarely on the policy agenda.
The Hong Kong Government has indicated that the process of legislative amendments in light of this judgment will begin in early 2009 with a consultation document. This move is in the right direction, but it is hoped that the process will not get mired in political debates and implementation detail arguments."
Opinions expressed in JURIST's Hotline are the sole responsibility of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of JURIST's editors, staff, or the University of Pittsburgh.
11:20 AM ET
Pui-yin Lo [Deputy Chairman, Special Committee on Constitutional Affairs and Human Rights, Hong Kong Bar Association]: "The judgment of Mr. Justice Andrew Cheung of the Hong Kong Court of First Instance on December 8, 2008, held that:
"the disenfranchisement provisions relating to voting and registration contravene the right to vote constitutionally guaranteed under article 26 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and article 21 of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights, so far as they affect prisoners (and those convicted persons who have been sentenced to...imprisonment, and who have not served the sentences or received a free pardon)"
It was not unexpected. The court was assisted in reaching the ruling by jurisprudence on the same topic of the top national courts in Australia, Canada and South Africa, as well as the European Court of Human Rights. Reference was also made to the modern trend towards more liberal treatment of prisoners in terms of voting rights noted in the ACLU's 2006 analysis of "felony disenfranchisement" of various jurisdictions around the globe.
Given that the sweeping disenfranchisement provisions in Hong Kong cover a significant portion of the prison population that are serving a term of imprisonment of 6 months or less, and disable a person's right to vote so long as she is serving a term of imprisonment on election day - taking no account of the expected date of release of a prisoner - cannot be justified under the proportionality test for determining whether they constitute an unreasonable restriction to the important political right of voting. The position of persons remanded in custody pending trial is even more clear: Their right to vote is not affected by the disenfranchisement provisions, but they cannot exercise their right because of lack of access to a polling booth.
The sad fact coming out of this judgment is that it disclosed inertia on the part of executive authorities, the statutory Electoral Affairs Commission that oversees elections, as well as the legislature in addressing the topic, even though electoral legislation in Hong Kong had been frequently amended in the last few decades to take account of the development of the political system. It will take strategic litigation by prisoners assisted by NGOs as well as publicly funded legal aid to put the topic squarely on the policy agenda.
The Hong Kong Government has indicated that the process of legislative amendments in light of this judgment will begin in early 2009 with a consultation document. This move is in the right direction, but it is hoped that the process will not get mired in political debates and implementation detail arguments."
Opinions expressed in JURIST's Hotline are the sole responsibility of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of JURIST's editors, staff, or the University of Pittsburgh.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Met Commander begins race claim
Met Commander begins race claim
A high-ranking Metropolitan Police officer is starting a claim of racial discrimination against the force.
"Met Commander Ali Dizaei claims ex-Met commissioner Sir Ian Blair and chief executive Catherine Crawford colluded to suspend him from duty".
MBPA chairman Alfred John said: "The Metropolitan Police Authority will have difficulty explaining how an officer, who according to very senior police officers performs exceptionally well in his job, has been suspended from duty when white senior officers subject to more serious complaints remain on duty and are, in fact, promoted".
A high-ranking Metropolitan Police officer is starting a claim of racial discrimination against the force.
"Met Commander Ali Dizaei claims ex-Met commissioner Sir Ian Blair and chief executive Catherine Crawford colluded to suspend him from duty".
MBPA chairman Alfred John said: "The Metropolitan Police Authority will have difficulty explaining how an officer, who according to very senior police officers performs exceptionally well in his job, has been suspended from duty when white senior officers subject to more serious complaints remain on duty and are, in fact, promoted".
Arrest of Damian Green and search of his office lawful
Arrest of Damian Green and search of his office lawful
The Met said the review of its inquiry "raises concerns" about methods but says the arrest and search of the MP's office were found to be "lawful".
How much longer is Damian Green and the Tory party going to claim that he did no wrong and that the police arrested him for only doing his job?
The Met said the review of its inquiry "raises concerns" about methods but says the arrest and search of the MP's office were found to be "lawful".
How much longer is Damian Green and the Tory party going to claim that he did no wrong and that the police arrested him for only doing his job?
Asbo chief arrested over disorder
Asbo chief arrested over disorder
Nottingham's chief anti-social behaviour officer has been arrested over an incident of "violent disorder".
"Richard Antcliff, who is in charge of the team at Nottingham City Council, was one of 15 men who were arrested on Sunday 7 December, police said.
The men were all suspected of being involved in "violent disorder" in Nottingham city centre in which four men were injured on 16 November.
The men have all been released on bail until 3 February 2009.
Mr Antcliff said he was unable to comment on the situation.
A spokesperson from Nottingham City Council said they were unable to comment on whether Mr Antcliff had returned to work but confirmed he was the chief anti-social behaviour officer and remained so".
Disgraceful conduct! If found guilty, he should be served with an Asbo!
Nottingham's chief anti-social behaviour officer has been arrested over an incident of "violent disorder".
"Richard Antcliff, who is in charge of the team at Nottingham City Council, was one of 15 men who were arrested on Sunday 7 December, police said.
The men were all suspected of being involved in "violent disorder" in Nottingham city centre in which four men were injured on 16 November.
The men have all been released on bail until 3 February 2009.
Mr Antcliff said he was unable to comment on the situation.
A spokesperson from Nottingham City Council said they were unable to comment on whether Mr Antcliff had returned to work but confirmed he was the chief anti-social behaviour officer and remained so".
Disgraceful conduct! If found guilty, he should be served with an Asbo!
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Town halls banned from using spy laws for petty offences
Town halls banned from using spy laws for petty offences
Town halls are to be banned from using anti-terror laws to spy on the public for petty offences, the Home Secretary is due to announce.
Jacqui Smith is to order an overhaul of the use of the controversial powers which have seen councils target the public for trivial offences such as dog fouling, littering or "bin crimes".
About bloody time too!
Town halls are to be banned from using anti-terror laws to spy on the public for petty offences, the Home Secretary is due to announce.
Jacqui Smith is to order an overhaul of the use of the controversial powers which have seen councils target the public for trivial offences such as dog fouling, littering or "bin crimes".
About bloody time too!
Monday, December 15, 2008
A unique and effective mechanism
A unique and effective mechanism
Introduction
The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) is the concrete expression at European level of a collective guarantee for some of the rights set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December 1948.
This collective guarantee is based not only on the contracting parties’ resolve to uphold a number of universal values but also on their common interest in safeguarding democratic security throughout Europe and securing the foundations of an ever closer union among European states.
The Convention is designed to ensure that states respect human rights, the rule of law and the principles of pluralist democracy. Acceptance of the Convention, as well as the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court and the binding nature of its judgments, has become a requirement for membership of the organisation (Interim Resolution DH(2001)80). The Convention is now also an integral part of member states’ domestic legal systems. Although the question of European Union accession to the system of protection established by the Council of Europe remains open, the EU also ensures that the Convention is observed.
From a practical standpoint, much of the Convention’s success is due to its well-developed monitoring machinery, which has made it possible, in practice, effectively to safeguard the rights and freedoms enshrined in it.
The Convention machinery is currently based on two institutions:
- European Court of Human Rights (“the Court”), an international court that delivers binding judgments on applications from individuals and states alleging violations of the Convention,
- the Committee of Ministers, the main political body of the Council of Europe, to which the Convention assigns the specific and very precise responsibility of supervising the execution of the Court’s judgments.
The execution of the Court’s judgments is an aspect of the Convention system about which the public still knows very little but which is obviously of prime importance. The Convention is now one of the keystones of the European political framework precisely because the execution of each individual judgment in which a state is found to have violated the Convention is closely and systematically monitored by the other states through their representation in the Committee of Ministers.
Obligation to comply with judgments
Under Article 46 § 1 of the Convention, states “undertake to abide by the final judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties”. This undertaking entails precise obligations for respondent states. On the one hand they must take measures in favour of the applicants to put an end to violations and, as far as possible, erase their consequences (restitutio in integrum), and, on the other hand, they must take the measures needed to prevent new, similar violations.
A first obligation is therefore the payment of just satisfaction (normally a sum of money), which the Court may award the applicant under Article 41 of the Convention and which covers, as appropriate, pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and/or costs and expenses. The payment of such compensation is a strict obligation which is clearly defined in the judgment.
However, the adverse consequences of the violation suffered by an injured party are not always adequately remedied by the payment of just satisfaction. Depending on the circumstances, the execution of the judgment may also require the respondent state to take individual measures in favour of the applicant, such as the re-opening of unfair proceedings, the destruction of information gathered in breach of the right to privacy or the revocation of a deportation order issued despite the risk of inhumane treatment in the country of destination. It may also require general measures – such as a review of legislation, rules and regulations or judicial practice - to prevent new, similar violations. There are many examples of such obligations imposed by the Court and the Committee of Ministers (see, for example, the judgment of the Court in the case of Scozzari and Giunta and Resolutions DH(99)245 in the Socialist Party and Others against Turkey case and IntResDH(99)434 concerning the activities of the security forces in Turkey, as well as the Rules for the application of Article 46 § 2 adopted by the Committee of Ministers).
Indeed, under the Convention, states have considerable freedom in the choice of the individual and general measures they take to meet these requirements. However, this freedom goes hand in hand with the monitoring by the Committee of Ministers (assisted by the Department for the execution of judgments), which ensures that the measures taken are appropriate and actually achieve the outcome sought in the Court’s judgment (see the aforementioned Scozzari and Giunta judgment). Where the notion of a choice of measures is in practice theoretical, since it is constrained by the nature of the violation, the Court can itself directly require certain steps to be taken. It has made use of this possibility for the first time in 2004 in two cases, ordering the release of applicants who were being arbitrarily detained in breach of Article 5 of the Convention (see the Assanidze v. Georgia judgment and the Ilascu and others v. Russia and Moldova judgment). Recently, in response notably to a Resolution by the Committee of Ministers on judgments revealing an underlying systemic problem, Res (2004)3, the Court has also started to provide better identification of systemic problems underlying violations found and also to give indications as to the execution measures required.
Examples of specific measures taken to abide by the judgments of the ECHR
In its judgment of 13 July 2000 (§ 249), in the Scozzari and Giunta case, the Grand Chamber of the Court summarised states’ obligation to take general measures to prevent further violations and individual measures to remedy the effects of the violation on the applicant as follows:
“by Article 46 of the Convention the High Contracting Parties undertook to abide by the final judgments of the Court in any case to which they were parties, execution being supervised by the Committee of Ministers. It follows, inter alia, that a judgment in which the Court finds a breach imposes on the respondent state a legal obligation not just to pay those concerned the sums awarded by way of just satisfaction, but also to choose, subject to supervision by the Committee of Ministers, the general and/or, if appropriate, individual measures to be adopted in their domestic legal order to put an end to the violation found by the Court and to redress so far as possible the effects (see, mutatis mutandis, the Papamichalopoulos and Others v. Greece (Article 50) judgment of
31 October 1995, Series A no. 330-B, pp. 58-59, § 34). Furthermore, subject to monitoring by the Committee of Ministers, the respondent state remains free to choose the means by which it will discharge its legal obligation under Article 46 of the Convention, provided that such means are compatible with the conclusions set out in the Court's judgment.”
Individual measures
If the violation continues to have adverse effects which have not been offset by the just satisfaction awarded to the applicant, the Committee of Ministers examines whether it is necessary for the national authorities to take individual measures. The aim is to put an end to any continuing violations and to redress, as far as possible, their effects (restitutio in integrum).
The individual measures depend on the nature of the violation and the applicant’s situation.
Re-opening and re-examination of national proceedings
Re-opening proceedings in the domestic courts may be an effective way of redressing the consequences of a violation of the Convention caused by unfair national proceedings (see, for example, Barberà , Messegué and Jabardo, Resolution DH (94) 84).
Re-opening proceedings may also provide the opportunity to rectify a domestic decision which is deemed incompatible with the substance of the Convention, for example, a prohibition on the publication of certain information (see, for example, Open Door and Dublin Well Woman, Resolution DH (96) 368). Similarly, when the Court concludes that an applicant’s expulsion from a country is, or would be, incompatible with the Convention, the execution of the judgment may require the authorities to reconsider their decisions to ensure that the applicant can return to the country in question or remain there if the deportation has not yet taken place (see, for example D. v. United Kingdom, Resolution DH(98) 010).
The reopening of domestic proceedings is of fundamental importance for the execution of the European Court’s judgments. Indeed, in some cases, this is the only form of "restitutio in integrum" possible, ie the only effective means of redressing the violation of the Convention.
In response to execution problems, caused in certain cases by the lack of appropriate national legislation on the re-opening of proceedings, the Committee of Ministers adopted a Recommendation to member states on the re-examination or reopening of certain cases at domestic level following judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (Recommendation No R (2000) 2), inviting them to ensure that there existed at national level adequate possibilities for achieving, as far as possible, restitutio in integrum, including the reopening of proceedings.
Other measures
Other measures may concern the destruction by the police of all files (or at least those used for operational purposes) containing information obtained in breach of the right to privacy (see, for example, the Amann v. Switzerland judgment, annotated agenda and order of business, 757th meeting), the recognition of a Church which had previously been refused recognition, in breach of Article 9 (see, for example, the Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova judgment, annotated agenda and order of business, 863rd meeting), or the introduction of previously non-existent legislation giving access to the Court (see, for example, The Holy Monasteries v. Greece, Resolution DH(97) 577).
General measures
General measures to prevent further similar violations are sometimes difficult to define and implement. The national authorities must first make a detailed examination of the causes of the violation of the Convention.
In some cases, the circumstances of the case clearly show that the violation is the result of domestic legislation. Sometimes, it is the lack of legislation which has led to the violation. In such cases, it falls to the state concerned to amend the existing legislation or introduce new, appropriate legislation in order to comply with the Court’s judgment.
Nevertheless, in many cases, the violation is due not to clear incompatibility between domestic legislation and the Convention but to a problem of judicial practice, i.e the way in which the national courts usually interpret domestic legislation and the Convention. In such cases it is necessary to change judicial practice along the lines suggested by the Court in order to execute the judgment.
When courts automatically adjust their legal stance and their interpretation of national law to meet the demands of the Convention, as reflected in the Court’s judgments, in the individual cases submitted to them, they make these judgments directly enforceable by virtue of their domestic law. This is what now happens in almost all member states and further similar violations can be effectively prevented by simply ensuring that the judgment is published and transmitted to the national authorities, accompanied, where appropriate, by an explanatory circular.
On the 50th anniversary of the Convention, the Committee of Experts for the
Improvement of Procedures for the Protection of Human Rights (DH-PR), which was set up by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, drew up an inventory of general measures taken by the Contracting States to implement the decisions taken by the Convention bodies since they were first established. This inventory is regularly updated by the Directorate General of Human Rights.
Monitoring arrangements and means used by the Committee of Ministers
Once the Court’s final judgment has been transmitted to the Committee of Ministers (Article 46 § 2 of the Convention), the latter invites the respondent state to inform it of the steps taken to pay the amounts awarded by the Court in respect of just satisfaction and, where appropriate, of the individual and general measures taken to abide by the judgment (see the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers on this subject). Once it has received this information, the Committee examines it closely. After establishing that the state concerned has taken all the necessary measures to abide by the judgment, the Committee adopts a resolution concluding that its functions under Article 46 § 2 of the Convention have been exercised.
The Directorate General of Human Rights assists the Committee of Ministers in exercising this responsibility under the Convention. In close co-operation with the authorities of the state concerned, the Directorate considers the measures that should be taken to comply with the Court’s judgment. At the Committee of Ministers’ request, the Directorate offers its opinion and advice, which are based on the experience and practice of the Convention bodies.
In accordance with its well-established practice, until the state in question has adopted satisfactory measures, the Committee of Ministers does not adopt a final resolution striking the judgment off its list of cases, and the state continues to be required to provide explanations or to take the necessary action. During the examination of the case, the Committee may take various measures to facilitate execution of the judgment. It may adopt interim resolutions, which usually contain information concerning the interim measures already taken and set a provisional calendar for the reforms to be undertaken or encourage the respondent state to pursue certain reforms or insist that it take the measures needed to comply with the judgment.
If difficulties are encountered in executing the judgment, the Directorate General of Human Rights often examines possible solutions in greater detail with the authorities concerned.
The Committee of Ministers may fully exercise its influence to persuade the state concerned to comply with the Court’s judgments, not least by noting its failure to comply with the Convention and taking appropriate action. In practice, the Committee of Ministers very seldom needs to exert political and diplomatic pressure but functions rather as a forum for constructive dialogue, thus helping states find satisfactory solutions enabling them to execute the Court’s judgments.
Introduction
The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) is the concrete expression at European level of a collective guarantee for some of the rights set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December 1948.
This collective guarantee is based not only on the contracting parties’ resolve to uphold a number of universal values but also on their common interest in safeguarding democratic security throughout Europe and securing the foundations of an ever closer union among European states.
The Convention is designed to ensure that states respect human rights, the rule of law and the principles of pluralist democracy. Acceptance of the Convention, as well as the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court and the binding nature of its judgments, has become a requirement for membership of the organisation (Interim Resolution DH(2001)80). The Convention is now also an integral part of member states’ domestic legal systems. Although the question of European Union accession to the system of protection established by the Council of Europe remains open, the EU also ensures that the Convention is observed.
From a practical standpoint, much of the Convention’s success is due to its well-developed monitoring machinery, which has made it possible, in practice, effectively to safeguard the rights and freedoms enshrined in it.
The Convention machinery is currently based on two institutions:
- European Court of Human Rights (“the Court”), an international court that delivers binding judgments on applications from individuals and states alleging violations of the Convention,
- the Committee of Ministers, the main political body of the Council of Europe, to which the Convention assigns the specific and very precise responsibility of supervising the execution of the Court’s judgments.
The execution of the Court’s judgments is an aspect of the Convention system about which the public still knows very little but which is obviously of prime importance. The Convention is now one of the keystones of the European political framework precisely because the execution of each individual judgment in which a state is found to have violated the Convention is closely and systematically monitored by the other states through their representation in the Committee of Ministers.
Obligation to comply with judgments
Under Article 46 § 1 of the Convention, states “undertake to abide by the final judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties”. This undertaking entails precise obligations for respondent states. On the one hand they must take measures in favour of the applicants to put an end to violations and, as far as possible, erase their consequences (restitutio in integrum), and, on the other hand, they must take the measures needed to prevent new, similar violations.
A first obligation is therefore the payment of just satisfaction (normally a sum of money), which the Court may award the applicant under Article 41 of the Convention and which covers, as appropriate, pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and/or costs and expenses. The payment of such compensation is a strict obligation which is clearly defined in the judgment.
However, the adverse consequences of the violation suffered by an injured party are not always adequately remedied by the payment of just satisfaction. Depending on the circumstances, the execution of the judgment may also require the respondent state to take individual measures in favour of the applicant, such as the re-opening of unfair proceedings, the destruction of information gathered in breach of the right to privacy or the revocation of a deportation order issued despite the risk of inhumane treatment in the country of destination. It may also require general measures – such as a review of legislation, rules and regulations or judicial practice - to prevent new, similar violations. There are many examples of such obligations imposed by the Court and the Committee of Ministers (see, for example, the judgment of the Court in the case of Scozzari and Giunta and Resolutions DH(99)245 in the Socialist Party and Others against Turkey case and IntResDH(99)434 concerning the activities of the security forces in Turkey, as well as the Rules for the application of Article 46 § 2 adopted by the Committee of Ministers).
Indeed, under the Convention, states have considerable freedom in the choice of the individual and general measures they take to meet these requirements. However, this freedom goes hand in hand with the monitoring by the Committee of Ministers (assisted by the Department for the execution of judgments), which ensures that the measures taken are appropriate and actually achieve the outcome sought in the Court’s judgment (see the aforementioned Scozzari and Giunta judgment). Where the notion of a choice of measures is in practice theoretical, since it is constrained by the nature of the violation, the Court can itself directly require certain steps to be taken. It has made use of this possibility for the first time in 2004 in two cases, ordering the release of applicants who were being arbitrarily detained in breach of Article 5 of the Convention (see the Assanidze v. Georgia judgment and the Ilascu and others v. Russia and Moldova judgment). Recently, in response notably to a Resolution by the Committee of Ministers on judgments revealing an underlying systemic problem, Res (2004)3, the Court has also started to provide better identification of systemic problems underlying violations found and also to give indications as to the execution measures required.
Examples of specific measures taken to abide by the judgments of the ECHR
In its judgment of 13 July 2000 (§ 249), in the Scozzari and Giunta case, the Grand Chamber of the Court summarised states’ obligation to take general measures to prevent further violations and individual measures to remedy the effects of the violation on the applicant as follows:
“by Article 46 of the Convention the High Contracting Parties undertook to abide by the final judgments of the Court in any case to which they were parties, execution being supervised by the Committee of Ministers. It follows, inter alia, that a judgment in which the Court finds a breach imposes on the respondent state a legal obligation not just to pay those concerned the sums awarded by way of just satisfaction, but also to choose, subject to supervision by the Committee of Ministers, the general and/or, if appropriate, individual measures to be adopted in their domestic legal order to put an end to the violation found by the Court and to redress so far as possible the effects (see, mutatis mutandis, the Papamichalopoulos and Others v. Greece (Article 50) judgment of
31 October 1995, Series A no. 330-B, pp. 58-59, § 34). Furthermore, subject to monitoring by the Committee of Ministers, the respondent state remains free to choose the means by which it will discharge its legal obligation under Article 46 of the Convention, provided that such means are compatible with the conclusions set out in the Court's judgment.”
Individual measures
If the violation continues to have adverse effects which have not been offset by the just satisfaction awarded to the applicant, the Committee of Ministers examines whether it is necessary for the national authorities to take individual measures. The aim is to put an end to any continuing violations and to redress, as far as possible, their effects (restitutio in integrum).
The individual measures depend on the nature of the violation and the applicant’s situation.
Re-opening and re-examination of national proceedings
Re-opening proceedings in the domestic courts may be an effective way of redressing the consequences of a violation of the Convention caused by unfair national proceedings (see, for example, Barberà , Messegué and Jabardo, Resolution DH (94) 84).
Re-opening proceedings may also provide the opportunity to rectify a domestic decision which is deemed incompatible with the substance of the Convention, for example, a prohibition on the publication of certain information (see, for example, Open Door and Dublin Well Woman, Resolution DH (96) 368). Similarly, when the Court concludes that an applicant’s expulsion from a country is, or would be, incompatible with the Convention, the execution of the judgment may require the authorities to reconsider their decisions to ensure that the applicant can return to the country in question or remain there if the deportation has not yet taken place (see, for example D. v. United Kingdom, Resolution DH(98) 010).
The reopening of domestic proceedings is of fundamental importance for the execution of the European Court’s judgments. Indeed, in some cases, this is the only form of "restitutio in integrum" possible, ie the only effective means of redressing the violation of the Convention.
In response to execution problems, caused in certain cases by the lack of appropriate national legislation on the re-opening of proceedings, the Committee of Ministers adopted a Recommendation to member states on the re-examination or reopening of certain cases at domestic level following judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (Recommendation No R (2000) 2), inviting them to ensure that there existed at national level adequate possibilities for achieving, as far as possible, restitutio in integrum, including the reopening of proceedings.
Other measures
Other measures may concern the destruction by the police of all files (or at least those used for operational purposes) containing information obtained in breach of the right to privacy (see, for example, the Amann v. Switzerland judgment, annotated agenda and order of business, 757th meeting), the recognition of a Church which had previously been refused recognition, in breach of Article 9 (see, for example, the Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova judgment, annotated agenda and order of business, 863rd meeting), or the introduction of previously non-existent legislation giving access to the Court (see, for example, The Holy Monasteries v. Greece, Resolution DH(97) 577).
General measures
General measures to prevent further similar violations are sometimes difficult to define and implement. The national authorities must first make a detailed examination of the causes of the violation of the Convention.
In some cases, the circumstances of the case clearly show that the violation is the result of domestic legislation. Sometimes, it is the lack of legislation which has led to the violation. In such cases, it falls to the state concerned to amend the existing legislation or introduce new, appropriate legislation in order to comply with the Court’s judgment.
Nevertheless, in many cases, the violation is due not to clear incompatibility between domestic legislation and the Convention but to a problem of judicial practice, i.e the way in which the national courts usually interpret domestic legislation and the Convention. In such cases it is necessary to change judicial practice along the lines suggested by the Court in order to execute the judgment.
When courts automatically adjust their legal stance and their interpretation of national law to meet the demands of the Convention, as reflected in the Court’s judgments, in the individual cases submitted to them, they make these judgments directly enforceable by virtue of their domestic law. This is what now happens in almost all member states and further similar violations can be effectively prevented by simply ensuring that the judgment is published and transmitted to the national authorities, accompanied, where appropriate, by an explanatory circular.
On the 50th anniversary of the Convention, the Committee of Experts for the
Improvement of Procedures for the Protection of Human Rights (DH-PR), which was set up by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, drew up an inventory of general measures taken by the Contracting States to implement the decisions taken by the Convention bodies since they were first established. This inventory is regularly updated by the Directorate General of Human Rights.
Monitoring arrangements and means used by the Committee of Ministers
Once the Court’s final judgment has been transmitted to the Committee of Ministers (Article 46 § 2 of the Convention), the latter invites the respondent state to inform it of the steps taken to pay the amounts awarded by the Court in respect of just satisfaction and, where appropriate, of the individual and general measures taken to abide by the judgment (see the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers on this subject). Once it has received this information, the Committee examines it closely. After establishing that the state concerned has taken all the necessary measures to abide by the judgment, the Committee adopts a resolution concluding that its functions under Article 46 § 2 of the Convention have been exercised.
The Directorate General of Human Rights assists the Committee of Ministers in exercising this responsibility under the Convention. In close co-operation with the authorities of the state concerned, the Directorate considers the measures that should be taken to comply with the Court’s judgment. At the Committee of Ministers’ request, the Directorate offers its opinion and advice, which are based on the experience and practice of the Convention bodies.
In accordance with its well-established practice, until the state in question has adopted satisfactory measures, the Committee of Ministers does not adopt a final resolution striking the judgment off its list of cases, and the state continues to be required to provide explanations or to take the necessary action. During the examination of the case, the Committee may take various measures to facilitate execution of the judgment. It may adopt interim resolutions, which usually contain information concerning the interim measures already taken and set a provisional calendar for the reforms to be undertaken or encourage the respondent state to pursue certain reforms or insist that it take the measures needed to comply with the judgment.
If difficulties are encountered in executing the judgment, the Directorate General of Human Rights often examines possible solutions in greater detail with the authorities concerned.
The Committee of Ministers may fully exercise its influence to persuade the state concerned to comply with the Court’s judgments, not least by noting its failure to comply with the Convention and taking appropriate action. In practice, the Committee of Ministers very seldom needs to exert political and diplomatic pressure but functions rather as a forum for constructive dialogue, thus helping states find satisfactory solutions enabling them to execute the Court’s judgments.
Forget naked jam makers - prisons are the surprise calendar hit for 2009
Forget naked jam makers - prisons are the surprise calendar hit for 2009
Forget naked Women's Institute groups or scantily clad fire crews, a calendar featuring the drab walls of Britain's prisons has become a surprise best-seller.
Forget naked Women's Institute groups or scantily clad fire crews, a calendar featuring the drab walls of Britain's prisons has become a surprise best-seller.
Blind man's guide dog barred from restaurant for offending Muslims
Blind man's guide dog barred from restaurant for offending Muslims
A blind man has been turned away from a fashionable Indian restaurant because his guide dog offended Muslim staff.
Dirty fucking Muslims worried about the hygiene of a clean dog?
Cynical Chatter From The Underworld has a more politically correct post on this story here.
A blind man has been turned away from a fashionable Indian restaurant because his guide dog offended Muslim staff.
Dirty fucking Muslims worried about the hygiene of a clean dog?
Cynical Chatter From The Underworld has a more politically correct post on this story here.
Iran's bloggers thrive despite blocks
Iran's bloggers thrive despite blocks
Iran has one of the most vibrant blogging communities in the world - despite government boasts that it blocks five million websites. The BBC's Jon Leyne in Tehran is spending the day with bloggers to see what makes them tick.
And, still on a blogging theme...
Russia: land of bright lights and killer blogs
I've just spent four days in Russia, a country I last visited as a 13-year-old schoolboy 33 years ago. Just writing that sentence makes me feel old.
Rights and responsibilities bill is all wrong
Rights and responsibilities bill is all wrong
By Marcel Berlins
When the Queen's speech failed to mention the government's long-trailed plans for a "bill of rights and responsibilities", I felt a short burst of relief that this misguided measure had finally been laid to rest. After all, had there not been, a few weeks before, what was generally described as a cabinet revolt against the bill?
Alas, last week's Daily Mail put me right. Jack Straw, the justice secretary, made it clear in an interview with the paper that he was still committed to the idea and intended pursuing it.
It is difficult to know what to make of Straw at the moment. I think he does genuinely believe in the goodness and positive impact of the Human Rights Act, yet his defence of it, not least in the Daily Mail interview, has been muted. He did timidly point out that the act was being blamed for problems which were not its fault, and that people didn't notice when it did good, but his main thrust was that he understood the concerns of Mail readers about the act.
He somehow failed to point out that the Mail readers' antagonism was largely fuelled by the paper's reporting, which concentrated sensationally on those few examples where the act has been shown to reach objectionable or silly results.
Perhaps Straw has veered towards Mail-think, which would be sad. Whatever Straw really believes, a British "bill of rights and responsibilities" is not an answer. Adding responsibilities to rights will not create a "balance" as he claims; it will create a nonsense. The basic flaw is that rights and responsibilities do not logically belong to the same family. They are different animals. They cannot be set off against, or complement, one another. It makes no sense to say: "Here is a right, let's have a responsibility to balance it." If you have a legal right to something and you are denied it, you can go to court and demand it be restored, or that you are compensated.
But most responsibilities or duties are not of that ilk: they are more akin to statements of desirable behaviour by good citizens. That is not something the courts can, or should, be asked to rule upon.
It is difficult to think of responsibilities which are not the law but which lend themselves to being enforced in the courts. A bill that purports to balance rights and responsibilities can only be an illogical, unworkable, incoherent mess. Let Straw and the government admit it and go on to more important matters.
By Marcel Berlins
When the Queen's speech failed to mention the government's long-trailed plans for a "bill of rights and responsibilities", I felt a short burst of relief that this misguided measure had finally been laid to rest. After all, had there not been, a few weeks before, what was generally described as a cabinet revolt against the bill?
Alas, last week's Daily Mail put me right. Jack Straw, the justice secretary, made it clear in an interview with the paper that he was still committed to the idea and intended pursuing it.
It is difficult to know what to make of Straw at the moment. I think he does genuinely believe in the goodness and positive impact of the Human Rights Act, yet his defence of it, not least in the Daily Mail interview, has been muted. He did timidly point out that the act was being blamed for problems which were not its fault, and that people didn't notice when it did good, but his main thrust was that he understood the concerns of Mail readers about the act.
He somehow failed to point out that the Mail readers' antagonism was largely fuelled by the paper's reporting, which concentrated sensationally on those few examples where the act has been shown to reach objectionable or silly results.
Perhaps Straw has veered towards Mail-think, which would be sad. Whatever Straw really believes, a British "bill of rights and responsibilities" is not an answer. Adding responsibilities to rights will not create a "balance" as he claims; it will create a nonsense. The basic flaw is that rights and responsibilities do not logically belong to the same family. They are different animals. They cannot be set off against, or complement, one another. It makes no sense to say: "Here is a right, let's have a responsibility to balance it." If you have a legal right to something and you are denied it, you can go to court and demand it be restored, or that you are compensated.
But most responsibilities or duties are not of that ilk: they are more akin to statements of desirable behaviour by good citizens. That is not something the courts can, or should, be asked to rule upon.
It is difficult to think of responsibilities which are not the law but which lend themselves to being enforced in the courts. A bill that purports to balance rights and responsibilities can only be an illogical, unworkable, incoherent mess. Let Straw and the government admit it and go on to more important matters.
Terrorism adviser to Met is on wanted list
Terrorism adviser to Met is on wanted list
Interpol notice urges arrest of Islam TV chief
A man wanted by Interpol for his links to an alleged terrorist organisation has been advising Scotland Yard on countering Muslim extremism, a Times investigation has discovered.
Mohamed Ali Harrath has been the subject of the Interpol red notice since 1992 because of his alleged activities in Tunisia, where he co-founded the Tunisian Islamic Front (FIT).
Tunisia has accused Mr Harrath, the chief executive officer of the Islam Channel in Britain and an adviser to the Scotland Yard Muslim Contact Unit, of seeking help from Osama bin Laden. It says that the FIT wants to establish “an Islamic state by means of armed revolutionary violence”.
Mr Harrath has been convicted in absentia of numerous criminal and terrorism-related offences by Tunisian courts and sentenced to 56 years in prison. Tunisia is an ally of the West in the fight against terrorism but is regarded by critics as a police or one-party state. Its secular Government regards those who advocate an Islamic state as a threat to its stability.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Home Office to send family to be butchered by Mugabe's regime
Home Office to send family to be butchered by Mugabe's regime
Woman whose husband was killed for his links to the opposition has claim for asylum rejected after eight years in UK
So, criminals can stay but innocent victims must be deported just to keep the stats looking good?
Urban otters join foxes and squirrels in Britain's towns and cities
Urban otters join foxes and squirrels in Britain's towns and cities
They were driven to the edge of extinction by pollution, but now otters are staging a comeback that is seeing them even move into Britain's towns and cities.
They were driven to the edge of extinction by pollution, but now otters are staging a comeback that is seeing them even move into Britain's towns and cities.
£130 million refurbishment bill for Jack Straw's new offices
£130 million refurbishment bill for Jack Straw's new offices
The Ministry of Justice has been accused of wasting a "colossal" amount of taxpayers' money after spending more than £130 million refurbishing an old office block for its new headquarters.
At around a £1,000 per square foot to refurbish, and almost 20 times more expensive than it needed to be (more dodgy contracts?), I feel that genuine questions can be raised. However, that right idiot Nick Herbert is wrong to suggest that instead the government "might have used this money to prevent the early release of prisoners". Is the circus short of a clown, or is Nick Herbert appearing in a pantomime this Christmas?
Saturday, December 13, 2008
The bullshit house of cards that Jack built
The bullshit house of cards that Jack built
Jack Straw Response to Joint Letter 10122008 PDF
Comment: "Procrastination is the thief of time" (Edward Young) English poet (1683 - 1765).
Jack Straw Response to Joint Letter 10122008 PDF
Publish at Scribd or explore others:
Comment: "Procrastination is the thief of time" (Edward Young) English poet (1683 - 1765).
Friday, December 12, 2008
Cameron scores own goal
Cameron scores own goal
Middle image: Beau Bo D'Or
Conway family Christmas card image: JHL and RonKnee
Middle image: Beau Bo D'Or
Conway family Christmas card image: JHL and RonKnee
Lawyers made millions from sick miners
Lawyers made millions from sick miners
• Pair to be struck off for serious misconduct
• Firm earned £115m after misleading ill clients
The men who became two of the highest-paid solicitors in Britain by mishandling the claims of almost 100,000 sick miners will be struck off after being found guilty of misconduct yesterday.
James Beresford and Douglas Smith, partners in the South Yorkshire firm Beresfords, took advantage of vulnerable miners by putting their own commercial goals before those of their clients, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found. The company earned more than £115m under a government scheme for compensating miners with health claims, and Beresford himself made more than £16m in one year.
Sick miners' lawyers struck off
Two solicitors who took millions of pounds from compensation payouts given to sick miners have been struck off.
Comment: I don't usually say this...Lock em up and throw away the key!
Paedophile found stabbed to death at home
Paedophile found stabbed to death at home
A murder hunt is under way after a man thought to be a former child sex offender was found stabbed to death.
The victim, found at business premises in Wandsworth, south London, also suffered "non-fatal injuries" to other parts of his body, police said.
According to The Sun newspaper, these included wounds to his genitals.
He was found naked and covered in blood in his caravan on the site, the paper added.
Comment: I wonder if the Sun headline is It's the Sun wot dunnit
A murder hunt is under way after a man thought to be a former child sex offender was found stabbed to death.
The victim, found at business premises in Wandsworth, south London, also suffered "non-fatal injuries" to other parts of his body, police said.
According to The Sun newspaper, these included wounds to his genitals.
He was found naked and covered in blood in his caravan on the site, the paper added.
Comment: I wonder if the Sun headline is It's the Sun wot dunnit
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Brown saves the world but fails to save Woolworths
Brown saves the world but fails to save Woolworths
Brown pledges Woolworths support
Woolworths closure sale kicks off
Update: I have just popped into Woolworths to see if there is a bargain and to pay my last respects. There are notices stating closing down sale, and everything must go, and yet there was shelf after shelf full of tins of sweets and boxes of chocolates with notices offering 10% off. And there lies the problem, the same products are on sale at other stores where they sell at Buy One Get One Free.
Photoshop: RonKnee
Brown pledges Woolworths support
Woolworths closure sale kicks off
Update: I have just popped into Woolworths to see if there is a bargain and to pay my last respects. There are notices stating closing down sale, and everything must go, and yet there was shelf after shelf full of tins of sweets and boxes of chocolates with notices offering 10% off. And there lies the problem, the same products are on sale at other stores where they sell at Buy One Get One Free.
Photoshop: RonKnee
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Don't buy a turkey this Christmas, roast a Muslim instead
Don't buy a turkey this Christmas, roast a Muslim instead
Click on link below...
Don't buy a turkey this Christmas, roast a Muslim instead.
Update: Muslim Arbitration Tribunal: Why all the secrecy from Ministers?
Click on link below...
Don't buy a turkey this Christmas, roast a Muslim instead.
Update: Muslim Arbitration Tribunal: Why all the secrecy from Ministers?
Happy birthday UDHR and a warning for Jack Straw
Happy birthday UDHR and a warning for Jack Straw
Today the 60th birthday of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights should be cause for celebration. However, I am in no party mood. This is because both Jack Straw and David Cameron are seeking to rip up the Human Rights Act 1998, and deny citizens of this country the human rights enjoyed by most of the rest of Europe since 1948. We were 50 years behind Europe when we eventually incorporated the European Convention into domestic law. It was claimed that British Justice is the best in the world therefore it was the so-called less civilised nations that needed to tidy their act up not Britain. However, the European Court of Human Rights case-law showed that the UK is the worst violator of human rights. When I started studying the subject, I noted that the UK had been found guilty over 50 times and Italy came second with about 20 violations. I do not feel proud to be British given that we are known for re-offending on such a large scale. In fact, I am so ashamed of our record that I refuse to state that I am British. I prefer to call myself European.
According to the Human Rights Act:
6 Acts of public authorities
(1) It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.
The Ministry of Justice is responsible for the courts, prisons, probation, criminal law and sentencing. And responsible for securing human rights. The Ministry of Justice is a public authority. The Minister of Justice is Jack Straw.
Under the Convention, The First Protocol, Article 3, provides for the Right to free elections: The High Contracting Parties undertake to hold free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot, under conditions which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature.
I interpreted this to include prisoners. The ECtHR agreed with my interpretation of the law. CASE OF HIRST v. THE UNITED KINGDOM (NO. 2)(Application no. 74025/01)
Article 53 of the Convention states: The High Contracting Parties undertake to abide by the decision of the Court in any case to which they are Parties.
Article 54 of the Convention states: The judgment of the Court shall be transmitted to the Committee of Ministers which shall supervise its execution.
Whilst it is arguable that the Committee of Ministers do not appear to have the necessary teeth of a watchdog, and the Joint Committee on Human Rights also appears to be lacking the necessary teeth of a watchdog, it is no excuse for Jack Straw to continue being irresponsible and breaking the law to boot.
Last week noises were being made (Abbott and Portaloo on the Brillo Show) about a possible late Spring or early Summer General Election. Could it be that the unreasonable delay by the Ministry of Justice and the desire to prevent prisoners having a say in politics is going to backfire?
Prisoners may hold the key to the legal validity of the next General Election, the Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) concluded in its Annual Report published on 31 October 2008.
I'm alright Jack, I can vote now given that I am outside prison serving my life licence in the community. I wonder what Jack Straw will have to say when thousands and thousands of claims by prisoners seeking their human right and monetary damages clog up the court system?
Prison moves takeaways off menu
Prison moves takeaways off menu
An investigation into a £3,500 bill for takeaway food for prisoners at a Cambridgeshire maximum security jail has led to the meals being banned.
Comment: I wish somebody would take away Bridget Prentice...
Freedom is taking a battering under kneejerk New Labour
Freedom is taking a battering under kneejerk New Labour
Jack Straw's attack on the Human Rights Act is sly populism of the worst kind, and in keeping with his party's statist tradition
By Nick Clegg
Today is the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The declaration rests on a simple, radical insight: human rights are indivisible and universal - or they are nothing at all. So Jack Straw's headline-grabbing declaration that Britain's Human Rights Act has become a "villain's charter", and must be "rebalanced", should be seen for what it is: a rejection of the simple notion that all of us, no matter how rich or poor, how powerful or weak, possess certain inalienable rights.
Comment: Surely, this is not the same Nick Clegg who overturned the LibDem policy of supporting votes for all convicted prisoners?
Jack Straw's attack on the Human Rights Act is sly populism of the worst kind, and in keeping with his party's statist tradition
By Nick Clegg
Today is the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The declaration rests on a simple, radical insight: human rights are indivisible and universal - or they are nothing at all. So Jack Straw's headline-grabbing declaration that Britain's Human Rights Act has become a "villain's charter", and must be "rebalanced", should be seen for what it is: a rejection of the simple notion that all of us, no matter how rich or poor, how powerful or weak, possess certain inalienable rights.
Comment: Surely, this is not the same Nick Clegg who overturned the LibDem policy of supporting votes for all convicted prisoners?
Judge "devastated" that robbery case costing £22 million collapses for third time
Judge "devastated" that robbery case costing £22 million collapses for third time
A Heathrow robbery trial has been abandoned for the third time at the Old Bailey, at an estimated cost to the public of £22 million.
John Twomey, 60, the alleged robber, has been bailed and will now face a fourth trial over the hold-up of Menzies World Cargo warehouse at the airport in February 2004.
Judge Jeremy Roberts discharged the jury after five months. He would not give any reason for the decision, which he said came despite the "enormous cost to the public".
"I don't quite know how to say this, because it is the last thing I wanted to tell, you but I am afraid we are not going to be able to continue with this trial," he said.
"In the course of a major criminal trial like this one, events sometimes occur which create the risk of real injustice or unfairness to one side or the other and sometimes those events are so serious that the trial cannot continue.
"That is what has happened in this case. It wouldn't be appropriate for me to give you any further information about what has occurred".
The trial for a £1.75M robbery has so far cost £22M and still justice has not been served? What price justice?
A Heathrow robbery trial has been abandoned for the third time at the Old Bailey, at an estimated cost to the public of £22 million.
John Twomey, 60, the alleged robber, has been bailed and will now face a fourth trial over the hold-up of Menzies World Cargo warehouse at the airport in February 2004.
Judge Jeremy Roberts discharged the jury after five months. He would not give any reason for the decision, which he said came despite the "enormous cost to the public".
"I don't quite know how to say this, because it is the last thing I wanted to tell, you but I am afraid we are not going to be able to continue with this trial," he said.
"In the course of a major criminal trial like this one, events sometimes occur which create the risk of real injustice or unfairness to one side or the other and sometimes those events are so serious that the trial cannot continue.
"That is what has happened in this case. It wouldn't be appropriate for me to give you any further information about what has occurred".
The trial for a £1.75M robbery has so far cost £22M and still justice has not been served? What price justice?
Muslim lawyer Anjem Choudary brands Christmas 'evil'
Muslim lawyer Anjem Choudary brands Christmas 'evil'
Muslim preacher Anjem Choudary has branded Christmas "evil" in a sermon posted on the internet.
The lawyer, who recently praised the Mumbai terror attacks, urged all Muslims to reject traditional Christmas celebrations, claiming that they are forbidden by Allah.
The 41-year-old shocked Christians and even those of his own faith by branding yuletide festivities as "the pathway to hellfire".
Choudary, who is chairman of the Society of Muslim Lawyers, ruled out all celebrations, including having a Christmas tree, decorating the house or eating turkey.
And these twats want us to change our ways to fit into their lifestyle and allow sharia law to apply in England so that they can integrate?
Bah humbug!
Muslim preacher Anjem Choudary has branded Christmas "evil" in a sermon posted on the internet.
The lawyer, who recently praised the Mumbai terror attacks, urged all Muslims to reject traditional Christmas celebrations, claiming that they are forbidden by Allah.
The 41-year-old shocked Christians and even those of his own faith by branding yuletide festivities as "the pathway to hellfire".
Choudary, who is chairman of the Society of Muslim Lawyers, ruled out all celebrations, including having a Christmas tree, decorating the house or eating turkey.
And these twats want us to change our ways to fit into their lifestyle and allow sharia law to apply in England so that they can integrate?
Bah humbug!
Move to suspend inmate vote ruling
Move to suspend inmate voting rule
Move to suspend inmate vote ruling
Nickkita Lau
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
The government will ask the High Court to suspend its ruling giving prisoners the right to vote while it considers how to implement the judgment or whether to lodge an appeal.
Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam Sui-lung said the government will make their submissions for temporary relief within 14 days.
Judge Andrew Cheung Kui-nung on Monday made the landmark ruling clearing the hurdle for inmates to register and vote. Lam added the suspension will allow the government to conduct by-elections in accordance with the existing law if they do take place, and the government will decide whether to appeal after a decision on the suspension is made.
A public consultation will be conducted if the Legislative and Executive councils decide to draw a new line on whether and how voting rights of prisoners could be restricted in a reasonable manner.
Law Society president Lester Huang said Hong Kong should follow many other countries to allow prisoners the right to vote.
He said Cheung's ruling did not specify how that should be implemented, adding that the public should be consulted as soon as possible.
Bar Association chairman Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung said although the government will encounter difficulties when implementing the ruling - such as polling arrangements - he hopes it will respect the court's decision.
The ruling was made after a judicial review was sought by two inmates and lawmaker Leung Kwok-hung.
Move to suspend inmate vote ruling
Nickkita Lau
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
The government will ask the High Court to suspend its ruling giving prisoners the right to vote while it considers how to implement the judgment or whether to lodge an appeal.
Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam Sui-lung said the government will make their submissions for temporary relief within 14 days.
Judge Andrew Cheung Kui-nung on Monday made the landmark ruling clearing the hurdle for inmates to register and vote. Lam added the suspension will allow the government to conduct by-elections in accordance with the existing law if they do take place, and the government will decide whether to appeal after a decision on the suspension is made.
A public consultation will be conducted if the Legislative and Executive councils decide to draw a new line on whether and how voting rights of prisoners could be restricted in a reasonable manner.
Law Society president Lester Huang said Hong Kong should follow many other countries to allow prisoners the right to vote.
He said Cheung's ruling did not specify how that should be implemented, adding that the public should be consulted as soon as possible.
Bar Association chairman Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung said although the government will encounter difficulties when implementing the ruling - such as polling arrangements - he hopes it will respect the court's decision.
The ruling was made after a judicial review was sought by two inmates and lawmaker Leung Kwok-hung.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Diary of a trainee prison governor
Diary of a trainee prison governor
Running a prison is one of the toughest jobs going. Traditionally governors have worked up through the ranks, but now graduates are fast-tracked into senior roles to broaden the profile of the Prison Service.
Aged 26, and standing not much more than five feet tall, Isabel Taylor defies the stereotype of the distinctly male prison governor.
It's a job she has wanted since she was 11, and in 2005 she joined the Prison Service's intensive development scheme, a fast-track course for would-be governors. She is now a junior governor at Her Majesty's Prison Leeds, a Category B men's prison, as deputy head of offender management.
Here, she reflects on key moments from the past three years.
SEPTEMBER 2005
Three day introduction to intensive development scheme
I've had a letter from my prison saying I've got to be there at nine o'clock on Monday morning. It's going to be a major shock, coming straight out of university.
There's a whole new language to learn, not just acronyms, but also things that happen inside the prisons that I don't know about. I've never been faced with a group of prisoners before so I'm a bit nervous about that.
But I've always wanted to work in the prison service. I started looking into it when I was 11. Everyone always asks: "What do you want to do that for?" But it's only from the top down can you help the most amount of people, so I've got to get to the top to do that.
MID-SEPTEMBER 2005
First week in prison - Holme House in Stockton on Tees
There's been a violent incident in another part of the prison and some of the prisoners are moved onto my unit.
Until I've had a bit more training I think I'd better hang back as they are still quite aggressive.
All the prisoners are asking me how old I am because obviously I don't look my age: "Are you old enough to do this job Miss?" I just laugh and try not to give too much away about myself.
OCTOBER 2005
Training in how to control and restrain a violent prisoner
I hate this. It's horrible: tiring, hot, sweaty and smelly. The riot helmet is the worst bit because it's so restrictive - you can hardly see or hear. It's also physically exhausting because you've got all this gear on and it's quite heavy and you're trying to move at speed. If the weapon slips or your hold on the shield slips, and they're about to come crashing down on you with a weapon, anything could happen. Your skull could be fractured.
It's all gone through my head. It's just really scary. I've definitely had second, third and 24th thoughts about the job.
NOVEMBER 2005
Holme House Prison - first weeks as a qualified prison officer
I went home and was in tears all last week. I just think about the things I should have done better.
Two nights last week I had to ring up and check I'd not forgotten to do certain things. I said to my partner: "I'm rubbish at this job".
All I get all day is abuse and I think: "What am I doing?" But I'm trying to look at the big picture and see that in a few years it will be worth it, because I'll be doing what I really, really want to do.
SPRING 2006
Holme House - six months into the job
I was counting prisoners and I signed for how many I had, but it turned out one of them had put a dummy in the bed. It wasn't an escape attempt; the guy was trying to steal money and he'd hidden during the lunch period but he got found.
There's been an investigation. I feel so ashamed and now I'm obsessive that doors are locked behind me and I double check that I'm getting a response from prisoners. Everybody was waiting for the graduate to make a mistake and then I did. It's awful.
NOVEMBER 2006
Deerbolt Young Offenders Institute
I've been promoted to senior officer at Deerbolt. It's really hard walking onto the wing and saying: "I'm the boss now" when I'd only been in the job for nine months.
I have visions of my face splashed all over the Sun, with headlines saying: 'Young Governor gave prisoner licence to go out and rob old ladies'
But I'm really enjoying it and the staff have been brilliant. I've learned a lot about being a manager and how to treat people. One of the most difficult things I've had to do is tell someone who's been here for five years that their performance isn't good enough. They didn't take it particularly well either.
Combating staff resistance has been difficult and it's made me want to give in. But I've persevered and encouraged them to just try my ideas. And it's worked. There's been one or two occasions where I've been quite stubborn and not really listened to people around me with more experience. That's been the hardest lesson to learn.
OCTOBER 2007
Leeds Prison
I've had to conduct my first ROTL - Release on Temporary Licence - Board, assessing whether a prisoner will go out for a day or two and then come back into the prison. I've been looking at my watch constantly, thinking: "Oh, please let him come back". Thankfully he has, but it's a scary responsibility.
I have these visions of my face splashed all over the Sun newspaper, with headlines saying: "Young Governor gave prisoner licence to go out and rob old ladies". My face is perfect for that because I look so young and it would look like they had this YTS person making really important decisions.
JUNE 2008
Graduation Day
I can't believe how fast it's come.
It stuns me that I'm a governor. It's a bit scary because I was doing my staff development with my line manager the other day, and he was asking what I wanted to do next. I didn't know.
I've spent the past 14 years focusing on getting to this point. Now I'm here, I've got quite a lot of years left on my career. I've got to decide what to do with the rest of my life.
DECEMBER 2008
What I've learned since I started is don't try and hide what you are. Everywhere I've gone I've been really up front and said: "Here I am. I've only been in the job five minutes and I don't really know what I'm doing so you're going to have to help me". And so far it seems to have endeared people to me.
I've also learned people just do not take responsibility for their actions. It's made me more cynical about the way the world works. I'm not taking anything away from people who've had hard lives, but that doesn't necessarily lead to a life of crime.
I thought the prisoners would be so much more grateful for everything I did. It's really frustrating. They never say thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)