Smoking ban rebel landlord is jailed
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
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Yarl's Wood inmates were beaten
Yarl's Wood inmates were beaten
Immigration bosses to be quizzed after asylum seekers were 'beaten' by guards
MPs to investigate claims that women in Yarl's Wood detention centre were physically abused by officers during hunger strike
Senior Home Office officials will be questioned this week over allegations that women inside Yarl's Wood immigration detention centre were assaulted by staff using riot shields.
The Observer has gathered a series of testimonies from detainees inside the Bedfordshire centre who claimed they had witnessed women being beaten and injured during a disturbance this month.
One image, taken inside Yarl's Wood on a mobile phone, reveals extensive bruising to a woman's shoulder and legs allegedly caused by staff during the incident on 8 February, days after dozens of asylum seekers instigated a hunger strike over the length of their detention. Another image shows injuries to a detainee's finger after a guard had allegedly slammed a window on her hand.
With this going on and yet the MSM instead focuses on whether Gordon Brown is a bully!
Immigration bosses to be quizzed after asylum seekers were 'beaten' by guards
MPs to investigate claims that women in Yarl's Wood detention centre were physically abused by officers during hunger strike
Senior Home Office officials will be questioned this week over allegations that women inside Yarl's Wood immigration detention centre were assaulted by staff using riot shields.
The Observer has gathered a series of testimonies from detainees inside the Bedfordshire centre who claimed they had witnessed women being beaten and injured during a disturbance this month.
One image, taken inside Yarl's Wood on a mobile phone, reveals extensive bruising to a woman's shoulder and legs allegedly caused by staff during the incident on 8 February, days after dozens of asylum seekers instigated a hunger strike over the length of their detention. Another image shows injuries to a detainee's finger after a guard had allegedly slammed a window on her hand.
With this going on and yet the MSM instead focuses on whether Gordon Brown is a bully!
Ex-landlord jailed over smoking ban at Bolton pubs
Ex-landlord jailed over smoking ban at Bolton pubs
A former pub landlord who is thought to be the first person in the UK to be jailed after flouting the smoking ban is "devastated", his wife says.
Nick Hogan, 43, from Chorley, was sentenced to six months in prison for failing to pay fines for smoking ban breaches at his two Bolton pubs.
Hogan was found guilty of breaching the smoking ban in January 2008 at the Swan and the Barristers pubs he ran.
His wife Denise said the couple "never expected" he would be imprisoned.
The original hearing was told that on the day the ban came into force he organised a "mass light-up" in the two pubs.
He was fined £3,000 and ordered to pay £7,136 in costs.
And there was me thinking we only jailed those who need to be imprisoned for public safety?
A former pub landlord who is thought to be the first person in the UK to be jailed after flouting the smoking ban is "devastated", his wife says.
Nick Hogan, 43, from Chorley, was sentenced to six months in prison for failing to pay fines for smoking ban breaches at his two Bolton pubs.
Hogan was found guilty of breaching the smoking ban in January 2008 at the Swan and the Barristers pubs he ran.
His wife Denise said the couple "never expected" he would be imprisoned.
The original hearing was told that on the day the ban came into force he organised a "mass light-up" in the two pubs.
He was fined £3,000 and ordered to pay £7,136 in costs.
And there was me thinking we only jailed those who need to be imprisoned for public safety?
Shamed MPs can return to the House of Commons
Shamed MPs can return to the House of Commons
DISGRACED MPs will retain their privileged access to the House of Commons even after losing their seats in parliament.
Almost all will be entitled to a parliamentary pass for life as a result of a secret ruling by Michael Martin, the Commons Speaker who was ousted during the expenses scandal.
In the past only MPs with long service in the Commons have been able to obtain the pass, which gives access to the buildings and meeting places.
The ruling could help departing MPs to market their continuing connections with parliament to political lobbyists. Former members are forbidden from using the pass for lobbying, but there are no safeguards to stop them doing so.
What a shame this lot have no shame!
DISGRACED MPs will retain their privileged access to the House of Commons even after losing their seats in parliament.
Almost all will be entitled to a parliamentary pass for life as a result of a secret ruling by Michael Martin, the Commons Speaker who was ousted during the expenses scandal.
In the past only MPs with long service in the Commons have been able to obtain the pass, which gives access to the buildings and meeting places.
The ruling could help departing MPs to market their continuing connections with parliament to political lobbyists. Former members are forbidden from using the pass for lobbying, but there are no safeguards to stop them doing so.
What a shame this lot have no shame!
Saturday, February 27, 2010
High Court Writ Large
High Court Writ Large
The approach being taken here is Prison Law Inside Out. The claimant is aware that the Court will not be familiar with this approach to the law, nevertheless, this case will provide an opportunity for the Court to learn something new. The law is a living instrument, moving forward, which means that dinosaurs no longer rule the earth. The traditional black letter of the law teaching needs to be shelved in the Natural History Museum. Law in context, or the ‘living law’, is not new because the claimant studied this and adapted it to the context of prison law. Instead of studying the narrow approach of the black letter of the law teaching, Prison Law Inside Out takes a broader view. An example of Prison Law Inside Out in practice is Hirst v UK(No2).
It needs to be emphasised that unlike Rv Hirst, whereby the State prosecutes the individual this is a case of the Individual v the State. This does not include the public within the State, but it does involve the three arms of the State, namely the Executive, Judiciary and Parliament. It is also a challenge to the status quo.
It is a good thing that a formally unqualified jailhouse lawyer could bring such a case as Hirst v UK(No2) and win it in the highest court in Europe against the State’s formally qualified lawyers. But, it is a bad thing that the State is such a sore loser. The claimant feels that the State should have accepted defeat gracefully. Because not to have done so just means that although they lost the legal battle fair and square, by taking it then into the political arena and seeking to keep the battle going only harms the whole of the UK before the 47 Member States in the Council of Europe and the 800,000,000 people represented in the Council of Europe. The claimant rejects being labelled as either British or English, because of the shame attached to the nation and instead is now European. The Union Jack and the National Anthem make way for the European flag and the hymne européen. Wrapped up within Hirst v UK(No2) is Europe v the UK.
If you look on Amazon you will find a book titled ‘If I ignore it, it will go away and other lies I thought were true’ by Marsha Marks, and on the front cover is a picture of a woman kneeling down and her head is buried in the sand. This could just as well be Jack Straw with his head buried in the sand, thinking to himself if I ignore it (Hirst v UK(No2)) will go away. This could not be further from the truth. Because the case exposes the Executive, Judiciary and Parliament in the same kind of bad light that is shone upon the MPs expenses scandal. Whilst the three arms of the State play political ping pong, or if you prefer, political football with the case the ECtHR and Council of Europe have made their position clear. That is, all three arms of the State are responsible for solving the problem. The claimant is aware that the UK has the option of leaving the Council of Europe and the European Union to escape implementing the Hirst v UK(No2) decision. However, this may be too drastic a step to take. There is another solution to the legal/political problem set by the claimant.
In Chester, Burton J, states: “With Counsel's help, I have myself been taken through the Court's judgment in Hirst in detail”. And still he is none the wiser, because at best a lawyer can only approach prison law from an outside in perspective. As stated, the problem originates from an inside out perspective. A totally different outlook to someone looking in. For example, prison security is designed to keep prisoners in whereas a prisoner is seeking to escape. The claimant has actually used the security measures employed to keep him in prison to make good his escape. Therefore, seeing things from a different perspective adds to knowledge and should not be lightly dismissed. Some more examples are when a Minister makes a statement in the House of Commons claiming that the prison food budget has not been cut but has merely been replaced with a dietary scale, the Kitchen Principal Officer’s reply to this is “Bollocks!”. Similarly, when the House of Lords decided Hague and Weldon one of the Lords stated “Given the realities of day to day prison life” to support his reasoning. However, the claimant knows as much about the House of Lords tearooms as the Lord claimed to know about prison life.
The claimant feels it will help the court to understand the case and the issues if it takes into account where the Prisoners Votes Case started, and the catalyst which set it on a course for Europe. The place was the Hull Prison Special Unit. Between 1989-1991, the claimant read a chapter called No Votes in Prisons in Vivien Stern’s Bricks of Shame – Britain’s Prisons. Quote: “There are supposed to be ‘no votes in prisons’ and no political prizes for doing something about them. Any politician brave enough either to tell the truth about them or grasp the nettle and try to change the way they are run is likely, so it is believed, to run into difficulties with public opinion”. The author then went onto explain why the politicians perceptions of public opinion did not stand up to closer examination. Reading this chapter the claimant asked himself ‘Why are there no votes in prison?’. Two different perspectives; politicians worrying about losing votes; and the claimant wondering how to get votes for prisoners. Twenty years on and the claimant has moved forward, whereas the politicians have stood marking time.
Meanwhile, there were the prison riots of April 1990. Prison Law began to develop into a field of law in its own right. The claimant frustrated by the delay of 50 years between the UK signing up to the Convention, and its eventual incorporation, save for Articles 1 and 13, into domestic law. The claimant recognised that these omissions had the effect of limiting human rights in the UK, compared to those enjoyed by our European neighbours. In effect, it means we are second class citizens. Only recently, a MP has complained that he was told to travel by second class on the train on his expenses and that if he wanted to travel first class he had to pay for the upgrade out of his own pocket. We are second class citizens in the eyes of the law, and all he can complain about is that he has lost a perk following the expenses scandal!
It is worth examining the RIGHTS BROUGHT HOME: THE HUMAN RIGHTS BILL. In particular, where it states: “The United Kingdom is bound in international law to observe the Convention, which it ratified in 1951, and is answerable for any violation… It will then be up to the Government and Parliament to put matters right. The Bill makes a "fast-track" procedure available for the purpose of amending the law so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention… For individuals, and for those advising them, the road to Strasbourg is long and hard. Even when they get there, the Convention enforcement machinery is subject to long delays. This might be convenient for a government which was half-hearted about the Convention and the right of individuals to apply under it, since it postpones the moment at which changes in domestic law or practice must be made. But it is not in keeping with the importance which this Government attaches to the observance of basic human rights.”.
Then why the inordinate delay for 5 years?
The approach being taken here is Prison Law Inside Out. The claimant is aware that the Court will not be familiar with this approach to the law, nevertheless, this case will provide an opportunity for the Court to learn something new. The law is a living instrument, moving forward, which means that dinosaurs no longer rule the earth. The traditional black letter of the law teaching needs to be shelved in the Natural History Museum. Law in context, or the ‘living law’, is not new because the claimant studied this and adapted it to the context of prison law. Instead of studying the narrow approach of the black letter of the law teaching, Prison Law Inside Out takes a broader view. An example of Prison Law Inside Out in practice is Hirst v UK(No2).
It needs to be emphasised that unlike Rv Hirst, whereby the State prosecutes the individual this is a case of the Individual v the State. This does not include the public within the State, but it does involve the three arms of the State, namely the Executive, Judiciary and Parliament. It is also a challenge to the status quo.
It is a good thing that a formally unqualified jailhouse lawyer could bring such a case as Hirst v UK(No2) and win it in the highest court in Europe against the State’s formally qualified lawyers. But, it is a bad thing that the State is such a sore loser. The claimant feels that the State should have accepted defeat gracefully. Because not to have done so just means that although they lost the legal battle fair and square, by taking it then into the political arena and seeking to keep the battle going only harms the whole of the UK before the 47 Member States in the Council of Europe and the 800,000,000 people represented in the Council of Europe. The claimant rejects being labelled as either British or English, because of the shame attached to the nation and instead is now European. The Union Jack and the National Anthem make way for the European flag and the hymne européen. Wrapped up within Hirst v UK(No2) is Europe v the UK.
If you look on Amazon you will find a book titled ‘If I ignore it, it will go away and other lies I thought were true’ by Marsha Marks, and on the front cover is a picture of a woman kneeling down and her head is buried in the sand. This could just as well be Jack Straw with his head buried in the sand, thinking to himself if I ignore it (Hirst v UK(No2)) will go away. This could not be further from the truth. Because the case exposes the Executive, Judiciary and Parliament in the same kind of bad light that is shone upon the MPs expenses scandal. Whilst the three arms of the State play political ping pong, or if you prefer, political football with the case the ECtHR and Council of Europe have made their position clear. That is, all three arms of the State are responsible for solving the problem. The claimant is aware that the UK has the option of leaving the Council of Europe and the European Union to escape implementing the Hirst v UK(No2) decision. However, this may be too drastic a step to take. There is another solution to the legal/political problem set by the claimant.
In Chester, Burton J, states: “With Counsel's help, I have myself been taken through the Court's judgment in Hirst in detail”. And still he is none the wiser, because at best a lawyer can only approach prison law from an outside in perspective. As stated, the problem originates from an inside out perspective. A totally different outlook to someone looking in. For example, prison security is designed to keep prisoners in whereas a prisoner is seeking to escape. The claimant has actually used the security measures employed to keep him in prison to make good his escape. Therefore, seeing things from a different perspective adds to knowledge and should not be lightly dismissed. Some more examples are when a Minister makes a statement in the House of Commons claiming that the prison food budget has not been cut but has merely been replaced with a dietary scale, the Kitchen Principal Officer’s reply to this is “Bollocks!”. Similarly, when the House of Lords decided Hague and Weldon one of the Lords stated “Given the realities of day to day prison life” to support his reasoning. However, the claimant knows as much about the House of Lords tearooms as the Lord claimed to know about prison life.
The claimant feels it will help the court to understand the case and the issues if it takes into account where the Prisoners Votes Case started, and the catalyst which set it on a course for Europe. The place was the Hull Prison Special Unit. Between 1989-1991, the claimant read a chapter called No Votes in Prisons in Vivien Stern’s Bricks of Shame – Britain’s Prisons. Quote: “There are supposed to be ‘no votes in prisons’ and no political prizes for doing something about them. Any politician brave enough either to tell the truth about them or grasp the nettle and try to change the way they are run is likely, so it is believed, to run into difficulties with public opinion”. The author then went onto explain why the politicians perceptions of public opinion did not stand up to closer examination. Reading this chapter the claimant asked himself ‘Why are there no votes in prison?’. Two different perspectives; politicians worrying about losing votes; and the claimant wondering how to get votes for prisoners. Twenty years on and the claimant has moved forward, whereas the politicians have stood marking time.
Meanwhile, there were the prison riots of April 1990. Prison Law began to develop into a field of law in its own right. The claimant frustrated by the delay of 50 years between the UK signing up to the Convention, and its eventual incorporation, save for Articles 1 and 13, into domestic law. The claimant recognised that these omissions had the effect of limiting human rights in the UK, compared to those enjoyed by our European neighbours. In effect, it means we are second class citizens. Only recently, a MP has complained that he was told to travel by second class on the train on his expenses and that if he wanted to travel first class he had to pay for the upgrade out of his own pocket. We are second class citizens in the eyes of the law, and all he can complain about is that he has lost a perk following the expenses scandal!
It is worth examining the RIGHTS BROUGHT HOME: THE HUMAN RIGHTS BILL. In particular, where it states: “The United Kingdom is bound in international law to observe the Convention, which it ratified in 1951, and is answerable for any violation… It will then be up to the Government and Parliament to put matters right. The Bill makes a "fast-track" procedure available for the purpose of amending the law so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention… For individuals, and for those advising them, the road to Strasbourg is long and hard. Even when they get there, the Convention enforcement machinery is subject to long delays. This might be convenient for a government which was half-hearted about the Convention and the right of individuals to apply under it, since it postpones the moment at which changes in domestic law or practice must be made. But it is not in keeping with the importance which this Government attaches to the observance of basic human rights.”.
Then why the inordinate delay for 5 years?
Dominic Grieve: The Shadowy Justice Secretary
Dominic Grieve: The Shadowy Justice Secretary
A case study.
Case one
Man convicted of Criminal damage, Assault on police and Possession of drugs
Richard Strange, aged 29 of Essex Road, Romford was convicted at Havering Magistrates Court of criminal damage, assaulting a police officer and possession of drugs at Essex Road, Romford.
Strange was sentenced to a 1 year community order for each of the four offences, to run concurrently and a 2 year restraining order.
He was ordered to pay compensation to the victims of the criminal damage and compensation to the police officer he assaulted.
Case Two
Shakin' Stevens guilty of assaulting photographer
The 61-year-old was fined £300 for assault and criminal damage and ordered to pay the photographer £479 to compensate for his damaged camera lens.
Case Three
Dominic Grieve admits to assault and criminal damage. And the penalty in his case? The Tory party makes him the Shadow Justice Secretary? Is this justice?
BBC broadcaster 'admits' killing his terminally-ill partner
Ray Gosling tells viewers he smothered former lover because the man had Aids and was in 'terrible pain'
A spokesman for Nottinghamshire police said Gosling's confession would "have to be looked into".
And the latest news...
Gosling was arrested this morning, around 36 hours after he told viewers of the BBC's east Midlands Inside Out programme that he had used a pillow to suffocate an unidentified young man who he claimed was dying in hospital.
"We have arrested a 70-year-old man this morning on suspicion of murder following comments on the BBC's Inside Out programme on Monday," said a spokesman. Further statements are expected later in the day.
Dominic Grieve made his confessions to having committed both assault and criminal damage in the film The Fear Factory to be premiered in London on 1 March 2010.
There is no statute of limitations therefore no time limit for a prosecution. Justice has been delayed in this case. If the police do not look into this case, it will be a case of justice denied.
(This post was originally posted at 4:08pm on 19/2/10. Then this happened. Yesterday I was informed that Dominic Grieve has pulled out of the Q&A Panel. Apparently he gave as his reason something to do with a 3 line whip on Monday. Personally, I believe that either somebody tipped him off deliberately or David Cameron, or a journalist asked a question too many and too close to the subject and scared him off).
video removed for copyright reasons.
A case study.
Case one
Man convicted of Criminal damage, Assault on police and Possession of drugs
Richard Strange, aged 29 of Essex Road, Romford was convicted at Havering Magistrates Court of criminal damage, assaulting a police officer and possession of drugs at Essex Road, Romford.
Strange was sentenced to a 1 year community order for each of the four offences, to run concurrently and a 2 year restraining order.
He was ordered to pay compensation to the victims of the criminal damage and compensation to the police officer he assaulted.
Case Two
Shakin' Stevens guilty of assaulting photographer
The 61-year-old was fined £300 for assault and criminal damage and ordered to pay the photographer £479 to compensate for his damaged camera lens.
Case Three
Dominic Grieve admits to assault and criminal damage. And the penalty in his case? The Tory party makes him the Shadow Justice Secretary? Is this justice?
BBC broadcaster 'admits' killing his terminally-ill partner
Ray Gosling tells viewers he smothered former lover because the man had Aids and was in 'terrible pain'
A spokesman for Nottinghamshire police said Gosling's confession would "have to be looked into".
And the latest news...
Gosling was arrested this morning, around 36 hours after he told viewers of the BBC's east Midlands Inside Out programme that he had used a pillow to suffocate an unidentified young man who he claimed was dying in hospital.
"We have arrested a 70-year-old man this morning on suspicion of murder following comments on the BBC's Inside Out programme on Monday," said a spokesman. Further statements are expected later in the day.
Dominic Grieve made his confessions to having committed both assault and criminal damage in the film The Fear Factory to be premiered in London on 1 March 2010.
There is no statute of limitations therefore no time limit for a prosecution. Justice has been delayed in this case. If the police do not look into this case, it will be a case of justice denied.
(This post was originally posted at 4:08pm on 19/2/10. Then this happened. Yesterday I was informed that Dominic Grieve has pulled out of the Q&A Panel. Apparently he gave as his reason something to do with a 3 line whip on Monday. Personally, I believe that either somebody tipped him off deliberately or David Cameron, or a journalist asked a question too many and too close to the subject and scared him off).
video removed for copyright reasons.
Women fast-tracked to asylum denial
Women fast-tracked to asylum denial
Hundreds of refugee women are being shoved through a system where they don't have enough time to make a proper case
By Andrew Mawson
"The UK Border Agency has published a report today showing that targets to speed up the asylum procedure are unachievable. The chief inspector, John Vine, said that the agency deals with vulnerable people and "we should remember that, first and foremost, this is about people's lives".
But how do hundreds of women, including vulnerable ones with complex cases, end up in a Kafkaesque procedure known as the detained fast track (DFT) which is designed for straightforward cases with a quick resolution?
That's the question posed in a new report by Human Rights Watch published this week, Fast-Tracked Unfairness: Detention and Denial of Women Asylum Seekers in the UK.
Our research has shown that women with complex asylum claims – often based on family violence, rape or trafficking – are now being shunted through this fast-track system, even though their cases are inherently not capable of quick resolution.
Women such as Fatima H from Pakistan, who says her locally powerful husband, a man with close links to the police, subjected her to a sustained regime of domestic violence from which she had no way of escaping locally. Or Xiuxiu L from China, who says she was trafficked into the UK after being held as a sex slave for five years. Or Aabida M from Algeria, who said her affair outside of marriage led to threats from her family to kill her.
Once a woman is in the DFT system the odds are stacked against her. She is taken to Yarl's Wood and one or two days later interviewed for asylum. If refused – and in 2008 (the most recent full year figures available) 96% of claims were refused at first instance – she has two days in which to appeal. The appeal is then heard within 11 days. From start to finish the whole process takes two weeks. This gives insufficient time to assemble evidence or get expert opinions to support a claim. In 2008, 91% of appeals were rejected.
The Home Office claims that the statistics show that the system is working. Around a quarter of cases put into DFT are removed from it before the initial decision. Officials say that only cases capable of quick resolution pass through DFT. But solicitors and NGOs that provide legal representation say that re-routing back to the standard asylum system is usually due to quick intervention on their part and that many complex cases remain in DFT.
Human Rights Watch did not set out to assess whether Fatima, Xiuxiu, Aabida (not their real names) and other women in DFT should be granted asylum. We consider only whether their claims should have been put into the DFT procedure in the first place – and whether DFT gives them a decent chance to make their case. What many of these women have in common is that their claims are inherently complicated, involving their own states' failure to protect them from gender-based violence and abuse. Organisations that provide services to refugee women estimate that more than half of all women seeking asylum in the UK are survivors of sexual violence.
That the trauma of rape can inhibit women from seeking help is recognised by the UK's courts – but an asylum-seeker is expected to open up immediately to total strangers about her experiences. If she delays it may be too late. And she has to do this while in detention, quite probably to a legal representative she has only spoken to briefly over the phone and a case officer she might view as hostile. Cases like this cannot be processed at breakneck speed. The UKBA has guidelines about complex gender-related cases – but these appear to be applied inconsistently.
None of this should be news to the UKBA and the Home Office. In August 2006 the Home Office's own asylum quality team reported that the referral mechanism to DFT was not "sufficiently robust or substantive enough to properly identify complex gender-related claims".
In March 2008 UNHCR told the Home Office that DFT decisions often "fail to engage with the merits of the claim" and expressed concern about the speed of the process. In May 2009 the House of Commons home affairs committee said the government's aims of deterring fraudulent applications may disadvantage the often severely traumatised victims of trafficking.
By the end of 2011 UKBA aims to conclude 90% of new asylum cases within six months of application. But it is neither reasonable nor in accordance with the UK's obligations under international refugee law to seek to achieve this target by dint of using an inherently unfair procedure. The correct test of an asylum system is that those in need of protection receive it, not the speed with which they are rejected".
Hundreds of refugee women are being shoved through a system where they don't have enough time to make a proper case
By Andrew Mawson
"The UK Border Agency has published a report today showing that targets to speed up the asylum procedure are unachievable. The chief inspector, John Vine, said that the agency deals with vulnerable people and "we should remember that, first and foremost, this is about people's lives".
But how do hundreds of women, including vulnerable ones with complex cases, end up in a Kafkaesque procedure known as the detained fast track (DFT) which is designed for straightforward cases with a quick resolution?
That's the question posed in a new report by Human Rights Watch published this week, Fast-Tracked Unfairness: Detention and Denial of Women Asylum Seekers in the UK.
Our research has shown that women with complex asylum claims – often based on family violence, rape or trafficking – are now being shunted through this fast-track system, even though their cases are inherently not capable of quick resolution.
Women such as Fatima H from Pakistan, who says her locally powerful husband, a man with close links to the police, subjected her to a sustained regime of domestic violence from which she had no way of escaping locally. Or Xiuxiu L from China, who says she was trafficked into the UK after being held as a sex slave for five years. Or Aabida M from Algeria, who said her affair outside of marriage led to threats from her family to kill her.
Once a woman is in the DFT system the odds are stacked against her. She is taken to Yarl's Wood and one or two days later interviewed for asylum. If refused – and in 2008 (the most recent full year figures available) 96% of claims were refused at first instance – she has two days in which to appeal. The appeal is then heard within 11 days. From start to finish the whole process takes two weeks. This gives insufficient time to assemble evidence or get expert opinions to support a claim. In 2008, 91% of appeals were rejected.
The Home Office claims that the statistics show that the system is working. Around a quarter of cases put into DFT are removed from it before the initial decision. Officials say that only cases capable of quick resolution pass through DFT. But solicitors and NGOs that provide legal representation say that re-routing back to the standard asylum system is usually due to quick intervention on their part and that many complex cases remain in DFT.
Human Rights Watch did not set out to assess whether Fatima, Xiuxiu, Aabida (not their real names) and other women in DFT should be granted asylum. We consider only whether their claims should have been put into the DFT procedure in the first place – and whether DFT gives them a decent chance to make their case. What many of these women have in common is that their claims are inherently complicated, involving their own states' failure to protect them from gender-based violence and abuse. Organisations that provide services to refugee women estimate that more than half of all women seeking asylum in the UK are survivors of sexual violence.
That the trauma of rape can inhibit women from seeking help is recognised by the UK's courts – but an asylum-seeker is expected to open up immediately to total strangers about her experiences. If she delays it may be too late. And she has to do this while in detention, quite probably to a legal representative she has only spoken to briefly over the phone and a case officer she might view as hostile. Cases like this cannot be processed at breakneck speed. The UKBA has guidelines about complex gender-related cases – but these appear to be applied inconsistently.
None of this should be news to the UKBA and the Home Office. In August 2006 the Home Office's own asylum quality team reported that the referral mechanism to DFT was not "sufficiently robust or substantive enough to properly identify complex gender-related claims".
In March 2008 UNHCR told the Home Office that DFT decisions often "fail to engage with the merits of the claim" and expressed concern about the speed of the process. In May 2009 the House of Commons home affairs committee said the government's aims of deterring fraudulent applications may disadvantage the often severely traumatised victims of trafficking.
By the end of 2011 UKBA aims to conclude 90% of new asylum cases within six months of application. But it is neither reasonable nor in accordance with the UK's obligations under international refugee law to seek to achieve this target by dint of using an inherently unfair procedure. The correct test of an asylum system is that those in need of protection receive it, not the speed with which they are rejected".
Alan Johnson: Get out and get out now
Alan Johnson: Get out and get out now!
"Government fury as judges attack security services
Ministers back MI5 after highly critical verdict on secret service involvement in Binyam Mohamed case"
In a direct challenge to the court, Johnson said he totally rejected its verdict.
Since when does the Executive overrule the Judiciary? Alan Johnson has no public power to reject a court decision. Only the Supreme Court can reject the verdict.
There is too much of this Executive intereference with court decisions. Jack Straw has ignored the European Court decision in the Prisoners Votes Case.
These politicians should have thought about becoming judges instead of politicians if they want to become judges of legal cases.
Alan Johnson should offer a full apology or resign.
Read the judgment here.
"Government fury as judges attack security services
Ministers back MI5 after highly critical verdict on secret service involvement in Binyam Mohamed case"
In a direct challenge to the court, Johnson said he totally rejected its verdict.
Since when does the Executive overrule the Judiciary? Alan Johnson has no public power to reject a court decision. Only the Supreme Court can reject the verdict.
There is too much of this Executive intereference with court decisions. Jack Straw has ignored the European Court decision in the Prisoners Votes Case.
These politicians should have thought about becoming judges instead of politicians if they want to become judges of legal cases.
Alan Johnson should offer a full apology or resign.
Read the judgment here.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Striking a balance between punishment and compassion
Striking a balance between punishment and compassion
Interview with Phil Wheatley, head of the National Offender Management Service
By Erwin James
It’s expensive to lock people up, says Phil Wheatley, head of the National Offender Management Service. Photograph: Martin Godwin
What strikes you about Phil Wheatley is his steady manner, his dedication to his work, and the fact that he unfailingly strives to emphasise the importance of a humane and decent approach towards his organisation's "service users".
As director general of the National Offender Management Service (Noms), he controls a budget of around £4.5bn and is responsible for the welfare and supervision of around 260,000 offenders in prison and on probation. Outside the armed forces, it is possibly the biggest delivery job in government.
People who know him know that he loves his job with a passion. So why has the softly-spoken Yorkshireman decided to step down in the summer?
Wheatley, who has been in the civil service for 40 years, explains: "When I took the job on, it was decided then that it was such a big job that it would have to be put out to competition in two years. I made it clear that at the age I then was, nearly 60, I didn't compete for a job. What I didn't want to do was to apply for a job, fail to get it, and then leave as the person who didn't get something."
So would he have stayed on if he hadn't been expected to apply for his own job? "I would probably have stayed on for another six months or a year," he says vaguely.
New beginning
The Prison Officers Association will not be sorry to see him go. Its chairman, Colin Moses, hailed news of Wheatley's retirement as "an opportunity for a new beginning". And the National Association of Probation Officers has called for the abolition of Noms, describing the merger of prisons and probation in 2008 as "a dreadful disaster".
But the key issue is whether probation and prisons are working better under Noms. In his last annual report, chief inspector of probation Andrew Bridges pointed to the "historically significant" 5% reduction in reoffending rates in recent years among adult offenders serving sentences in the community. And he told me a few days ago that the probation service is showing "visible signs of tangible improvement, despite its resource difficulties". In addition, chief inspector of prisons Dame Anne Owers states in her eighth and final annual review, published today, that "prisons have improved, despite struggling with an increasing population and decreasing resources".
Under Wheatley's leadership, Noms has met or exceeded 27 of its 28 national performance targets for 2008/2009 – one of which was an £81m "efficiency saving". The target for 2009/2010 is £171m.
"No matter who wins the election," Wheatley says, "the question is how do we manage to run a safe and decent prison system and probation service that keeps the public protected with money that is already being reduced?"
He points out that he has already cut jobs at headquarters – "because there are more of us there than are adding value" – and reduced management layers by doing away with the rank of principal officer in prisons. But he maintains that "none of this affects prisoners or those on probation". He has also maximised his purchasing power by stopping individual prisons having their own contracts with suppliers, instead negotiating supplies as one big organisation. He says: "Supermarkets often give their supplier a hard time, but give their customers reduced prices. In a way, I'm trying to do the same."
Different perspective
Wheatley, whose mother was a nurse and whose father was an environmental officer, had his interest in criminal justice sparked at Sheffield University by criminology lecturer Tony Bottoms, an ex-probation officer who went on to become chancellor of Cambridge University's Institute of Criminology. "Tony gave me a different perspective on what working with people who had been involved in crime was like," Wheatley says.
A holiday job working for the parks department in Leeds was an earlier catalyst. "In many ways, it was one of the best jobs I ever had. A real nice group of people I worked with, and we made a difference. You looked at your park at the end of the day and it looked really good, in a way that I can't do now in quite the same way."
It also brought him close to people with troubled lives – such as people with alcohol problems, who would drift in and out of prison. "I found them really quite interesting," he says. "Somebody suggested that I might like to work in a prison, and that's what I did."
He began his career as a prison officer, but swiftly moved into management. What sort of person, in his view, makes the ideal prison officer? "There isn't a single ideal," he says. "It's got to be a mix of people, but at the core of it is the ability to understand people and to be able to empathise more than sympathise."
But surely one major problem is that we put too many people in prison? "That's an area I avoid commenting on," Wheatley says. "I'm a jailer. It is for society to work out what they think is right for people, realising that locking people up carries a cost to those we lock up and to their families, and a cost to society. It's expensive to lock people up.
"I think the idea of prison as a holiday camp is a very, very bad joke, but we've got to be careful we keep a balance. It is acceptable to say prison should involve some deprivation, but we've got to make sure it is not vindictive. There are 13,000 prisoners serving indeterminate sentences who will be inside for 10, 15 or 20 years. We have to offer a way of doing imprisonment that is bearable and constructive."
A recent poll indicated that 54% of the British public would vote for the reintroduction of the death penalty. But Wheatley, who joined the prison service the same year that capital punishment was abolished, says he has worked with staff who had been at the side of the hangman when the condemned were executed, and it is "not something that I have ever wanted to deal with".
Meanwhile, he wishes his successor well – and looks forward to "spending more time with my grandchildren".
Curriculum vitae
Age 61.
Status Married (to Ellie Roy, former chief executive, Youth Justice Board); two children, four grandchildren.
Lives Central London.
Education Leeds grammar school; Sheffield University, law degree.
Career 2008 --present: director general, National Offender Management Service; 2003-2008;: director general, Prison Service; 1999-2003:; deputy director general, Prison Service;, 1995-99;: director of dispersal prisons (high security prisons) and became member of the Prisons Board; 1992-95;: assistant director, Custody Group/DOC1 Division; 1990-92;: prison service, area manager for east Midlands; 1986-90: governor, HMP Hull; 1982-86: deputy governor, HMP Gartree; 1978-82: governor 4, HMP Leeds; 1974-78;: governor 4, Prison Service College:; 1970-74;: assistant governor, HMP Hull; 1969-70;: prison officer, HM Borstal Hatfield, HMP Leeds; ???1969: Armley prison, Leeds???.
Public life 2004, Awarded the Order of the Bath (CB) in 2004.
Interests Good wine, good food, and holidays in which to enjoy them.
Interview with Phil Wheatley, head of the National Offender Management Service
By Erwin James
It’s expensive to lock people up, says Phil Wheatley, head of the National Offender Management Service. Photograph: Martin GodwinWhat strikes you about Phil Wheatley is his steady manner, his dedication to his work, and the fact that he unfailingly strives to emphasise the importance of a humane and decent approach towards his organisation's "service users".
As director general of the National Offender Management Service (Noms), he controls a budget of around £4.5bn and is responsible for the welfare and supervision of around 260,000 offenders in prison and on probation. Outside the armed forces, it is possibly the biggest delivery job in government.
People who know him know that he loves his job with a passion. So why has the softly-spoken Yorkshireman decided to step down in the summer?
Wheatley, who has been in the civil service for 40 years, explains: "When I took the job on, it was decided then that it was such a big job that it would have to be put out to competition in two years. I made it clear that at the age I then was, nearly 60, I didn't compete for a job. What I didn't want to do was to apply for a job, fail to get it, and then leave as the person who didn't get something."
So would he have stayed on if he hadn't been expected to apply for his own job? "I would probably have stayed on for another six months or a year," he says vaguely.
New beginning
The Prison Officers Association will not be sorry to see him go. Its chairman, Colin Moses, hailed news of Wheatley's retirement as "an opportunity for a new beginning". And the National Association of Probation Officers has called for the abolition of Noms, describing the merger of prisons and probation in 2008 as "a dreadful disaster".
But the key issue is whether probation and prisons are working better under Noms. In his last annual report, chief inspector of probation Andrew Bridges pointed to the "historically significant" 5% reduction in reoffending rates in recent years among adult offenders serving sentences in the community. And he told me a few days ago that the probation service is showing "visible signs of tangible improvement, despite its resource difficulties". In addition, chief inspector of prisons Dame Anne Owers states in her eighth and final annual review, published today, that "prisons have improved, despite struggling with an increasing population and decreasing resources".
Under Wheatley's leadership, Noms has met or exceeded 27 of its 28 national performance targets for 2008/2009 – one of which was an £81m "efficiency saving". The target for 2009/2010 is £171m.
"No matter who wins the election," Wheatley says, "the question is how do we manage to run a safe and decent prison system and probation service that keeps the public protected with money that is already being reduced?"
He points out that he has already cut jobs at headquarters – "because there are more of us there than are adding value" – and reduced management layers by doing away with the rank of principal officer in prisons. But he maintains that "none of this affects prisoners or those on probation". He has also maximised his purchasing power by stopping individual prisons having their own contracts with suppliers, instead negotiating supplies as one big organisation. He says: "Supermarkets often give their supplier a hard time, but give their customers reduced prices. In a way, I'm trying to do the same."
Different perspective
Wheatley, whose mother was a nurse and whose father was an environmental officer, had his interest in criminal justice sparked at Sheffield University by criminology lecturer Tony Bottoms, an ex-probation officer who went on to become chancellor of Cambridge University's Institute of Criminology. "Tony gave me a different perspective on what working with people who had been involved in crime was like," Wheatley says.
A holiday job working for the parks department in Leeds was an earlier catalyst. "In many ways, it was one of the best jobs I ever had. A real nice group of people I worked with, and we made a difference. You looked at your park at the end of the day and it looked really good, in a way that I can't do now in quite the same way."
It also brought him close to people with troubled lives – such as people with alcohol problems, who would drift in and out of prison. "I found them really quite interesting," he says. "Somebody suggested that I might like to work in a prison, and that's what I did."
He began his career as a prison officer, but swiftly moved into management. What sort of person, in his view, makes the ideal prison officer? "There isn't a single ideal," he says. "It's got to be a mix of people, but at the core of it is the ability to understand people and to be able to empathise more than sympathise."
But surely one major problem is that we put too many people in prison? "That's an area I avoid commenting on," Wheatley says. "I'm a jailer. It is for society to work out what they think is right for people, realising that locking people up carries a cost to those we lock up and to their families, and a cost to society. It's expensive to lock people up.
"I think the idea of prison as a holiday camp is a very, very bad joke, but we've got to be careful we keep a balance. It is acceptable to say prison should involve some deprivation, but we've got to make sure it is not vindictive. There are 13,000 prisoners serving indeterminate sentences who will be inside for 10, 15 or 20 years. We have to offer a way of doing imprisonment that is bearable and constructive."
A recent poll indicated that 54% of the British public would vote for the reintroduction of the death penalty. But Wheatley, who joined the prison service the same year that capital punishment was abolished, says he has worked with staff who had been at the side of the hangman when the condemned were executed, and it is "not something that I have ever wanted to deal with".
Meanwhile, he wishes his successor well – and looks forward to "spending more time with my grandchildren".
Curriculum vitae
Age 61.
Status Married (to Ellie Roy, former chief executive, Youth Justice Board); two children, four grandchildren.
Lives Central London.
Education Leeds grammar school; Sheffield University, law degree.
Career 2008 --present: director general, National Offender Management Service; 2003-2008;: director general, Prison Service; 1999-2003:; deputy director general, Prison Service;, 1995-99;: director of dispersal prisons (high security prisons) and became member of the Prisons Board; 1992-95;: assistant director, Custody Group/DOC1 Division; 1990-92;: prison service, area manager for east Midlands; 1986-90: governor, HMP Hull; 1982-86: deputy governor, HMP Gartree; 1978-82: governor 4, HMP Leeds; 1974-78;: governor 4, Prison Service College:; 1970-74;: assistant governor, HMP Hull; 1969-70;: prison officer, HM Borstal Hatfield, HMP Leeds; ???1969: Armley prison, Leeds???.
Public life 2004, Awarded the Order of the Bath (CB) in 2004.
Interests Good wine, good food, and holidays in which to enjoy them.
The Fear Factory by Spirit Level Films
The Fear Factory by Spirit Level Films
I was asked by The Fear Factory team at Spirit Level Films whether I would write a blog post for their blog. Anything to oblige.
It'll be alright on the night
I am undoubtedly the film's star. It start's with a black screen with a voice over giving a news bulletin. I was reminded of Simon and Garfunkel's Seven O'Clock News/Silent Night. Then came the image of a baby in the womb. More voice over, I recognised Juliet Lyon, Director of the Prison Reform Trust. I was just settling down in the chair as a voice over stated "Nobody want's to meet a killer on the streets at night", cue me sat in what reminded me of the chair in Mastermind. I sat up with a jolt, as though somebody had hit me on the back of the head. It was a shock to the system. A masterstroke to grab the audience's full attention. I was not offended. However, I have been told that some of my supporters are hot happy with it.
On reflection, I recall telling the production team about the time I was going through the transformation from law breaker to law-maker. And I asked myself the question 'How would you like to live next door to a killer?', 'How would you like to live in the same house as a killer?'. Until I could answer questions such as these to my own satisfaction, I felt I could not satisfy the Parole Board that I was safe enough to be let loose on the general public.
The Fear Factory is about the youth justice system. Personal accounts from those who have gone through it, those who have worked in it, those who try to reform it, and politicians and journalists responsible for it failing as badly as it does.
Dominic Grieve comes across as a blithering idiot. He made a fool of himself stating crime had risen when all the evidence is that it has fallen. It was pointed out to him that he was out by a factor of 8. I don't want to do a spoiler, but there is another scene where I feel that Dominic Grieve has put himself into the hot seat.
The National Offender Management Service quotes the cost of £30,000 per prison place per year. However, when all the other costs are factored in that figure rises to £200,000!
In a word, I thought the film is brilliant. It should act as a wake up call for society, the media and politicians.
I was asked by The Fear Factory team at Spirit Level Films whether I would write a blog post for their blog. Anything to oblige.
It'll be alright on the night
I am undoubtedly the film's star. It start's with a black screen with a voice over giving a news bulletin. I was reminded of Simon and Garfunkel's Seven O'Clock News/Silent Night. Then came the image of a baby in the womb. More voice over, I recognised Juliet Lyon, Director of the Prison Reform Trust. I was just settling down in the chair as a voice over stated "Nobody want's to meet a killer on the streets at night", cue me sat in what reminded me of the chair in Mastermind. I sat up with a jolt, as though somebody had hit me on the back of the head. It was a shock to the system. A masterstroke to grab the audience's full attention. I was not offended. However, I have been told that some of my supporters are hot happy with it.
On reflection, I recall telling the production team about the time I was going through the transformation from law breaker to law-maker. And I asked myself the question 'How would you like to live next door to a killer?', 'How would you like to live in the same house as a killer?'. Until I could answer questions such as these to my own satisfaction, I felt I could not satisfy the Parole Board that I was safe enough to be let loose on the general public.
The Fear Factory is about the youth justice system. Personal accounts from those who have gone through it, those who have worked in it, those who try to reform it, and politicians and journalists responsible for it failing as badly as it does.
Dominic Grieve comes across as a blithering idiot. He made a fool of himself stating crime had risen when all the evidence is that it has fallen. It was pointed out to him that he was out by a factor of 8. I don't want to do a spoiler, but there is another scene where I feel that Dominic Grieve has put himself into the hot seat.
The National Offender Management Service quotes the cost of £30,000 per prison place per year. However, when all the other costs are factored in that figure rises to £200,000!
In a word, I thought the film is brilliant. It should act as a wake up call for society, the media and politicians.
Did Leeds Police kill prisoner?
Did Leeds Police kill prisoner?
Police are visiting residents and businesses in Leeds to try and trace the last movements of a man who died after becoming ill while in custody.
Jason Jones, 39, died in Leeds General Infirmary on 5 February. He had been remanded at HMP Leeds after being arrested in Beeston on 2 February.
A post-mortem showed he suffered a brain injury and police believe he was attacked before he was detained.
Had he been attacked prior to being taken into custody, I would expect the custody records to show that his injuries were logged and he was examined by the police doctor. I suspect this did not happen. And, the police are seeking to lay the blame for cause of death elsewhere. Interesting, to say the least.
Police are visiting residents and businesses in Leeds to try and trace the last movements of a man who died after becoming ill while in custody.
Jason Jones, 39, died in Leeds General Infirmary on 5 February. He had been remanded at HMP Leeds after being arrested in Beeston on 2 February.
A post-mortem showed he suffered a brain injury and police believe he was attacked before he was detained.
Had he been attacked prior to being taken into custody, I would expect the custody records to show that his injuries were logged and he was examined by the police doctor. I suspect this did not happen. And, the police are seeking to lay the blame for cause of death elsewhere. Interesting, to say the least.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Nigel Farage done up like a UKipper
Nigel Farage done up like a UKipper
Iain Dale's Book Announcement
Unredacted by JHL
Cover design by Jaycee
Iain Dale's Book Announcement
Unredacted by JHL
Cover design by Jaycee
Democracy behind bars
Democracy behind bars
Jailhouselawyer on Network Europe radio interviewed by Norwegian Lars Bevanger. It starts about 10 minutes into the programme.
09:37 - 14:05
Listen here.
Jailhouselawyer on Network Europe radio interviewed by Norwegian Lars Bevanger. It starts about 10 minutes into the programme.
09:37 - 14:05
Listen here.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Tyranny alive and well in the UK: Those in WWII all died in vain
Tyranny alive and well in the UK: Those in WWII all died in vain
World War II was fought to put an end to tyranny in Europe.
And the Council of Europe was formed to ensure that Member States guaranteed citizens their human rights, promised them democracy, and governance by rule of law. The state of the UK is a traitor to the people of the UK.
What price peace without freedom?
The people of the UK are subjected to oppression and repression. The measure of liberty is gagued by how prisoners are treated by the state, supposedly in the public's name. If the state fails to treat prisoners with the simple objectives of rule of law, democracy, and human rights, there must be other examples where the general public suffer the same treatment.
To fight to end tyranny just for it to creep up in the UK was a exercise in wasted human lives. Our only salvation is reform from the bottom up.
We shouldn't be voting; we should be taking to the streets!
World War II was fought to put an end to tyranny in Europe.
And the Council of Europe was formed to ensure that Member States guaranteed citizens their human rights, promised them democracy, and governance by rule of law. The state of the UK is a traitor to the people of the UK.
What price peace without freedom?
The people of the UK are subjected to oppression and repression. The measure of liberty is gagued by how prisoners are treated by the state, supposedly in the public's name. If the state fails to treat prisoners with the simple objectives of rule of law, democracy, and human rights, there must be other examples where the general public suffer the same treatment.
To fight to end tyranny just for it to creep up in the UK was a exercise in wasted human lives. Our only salvation is reform from the bottom up.
We shouldn't be voting; we should be taking to the streets!
Council of Europe and UK in a bugger's muddle over Prisoners Votes Case
Council of Europe and UK in a bugger's muddle over Prisoners Votes Case
According to the Council of Europe there is a commitment to safeguarding Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law in the Member States of the Council of Europe.
For me this is as simple as A,B,C or 1,2,3.
A. Human Rights
B. Democracy
C. Rule of Law
or
1. Human Rights
2. Democracy
3. Rule of Law
Has the Council of Europe honoured its commitment in the Prisoners Votes Case, Hirst v UK(No2)?
The relevant Articles under the Convention are;
ARTICLE 52
The judgment of the Court shall be final.
ARTICLE 53
The High Contracting Parties undertake to abide by the decision of the Court in any case to which they are parties.
ARTICLE 54
The judgment of the Court shall be transmitted to the Committee of Ministers which shall supervise its execution.
The original Court judgment in Hirst v UK(No2), by the Chamber, was 30th of March 2004. However, the UK decided to appeal to the Grand Chamber and this judgment was on 6th of October 2005.
Meanwhile, the UK general election was held on Thursday, 5th of May 2005.
The Council of Europe celebrated its 60th anniversary on 5th of May 2009.
But, the convicted prisoners in the UK are in no mood for celebrating because between the UK and the Council of Europe they feel that they have been let down in relation to their human right to vote, are excluded from democracy and the rule of law is not being applied to their situation. Therefore, lawyers and reform groups are advocating the next step.
"Rule 11 *
Infringement Proceedings
1. When, in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 4, of the Convention, the Committee of Ministers considers that a High Contracting Party refuses to abide by a final judgment in a case to which it is party, it may, after serving formal notice on that Party and by decision adopted by a majority vote of two thirds of the representatives entitled to sit on the Committee, refer to the Court the question whether that Party has failed to fulfil its obligation.
2. Infringement proceedings should be brought only in exceptional circumstances. They shall not be initiated unless formal notice of the Committee’s intention to bring such proceedings has been given to the High Contracting Party concerned. Such formal notice shall be given ultimately six months before the lodging of proceedings, unless the Committee decides otherwise, and shall take the form of an interim resolution. This resolution shall be adopted by a majority vote of two-thirds of the representatives entitled to sit on the Committee.
3. The referral decision of the matter to the Court shall take the form of an interim resolution. It shall be reasoned and concisely reflect the views of the High Contracting Party concerned.
4. The Committee of Ministers shall be represented before the Court by its Chair unless the Committee decides upon another form of representation. This decision shall be taken by a two-thirds majority of the representatives casting a vote and a majority of the representatives entitled to sit on the Committee.
Note * Rules 10 and 11 concern the implementation of Article 16 of Protocol No. 14 to the European Convention of Human Rights and consequently will only become applicable once the Protocol enters into force".
"On Thursday, just before the opening of the Ministerial Conference, the Russian Minister of Justice Alexander Konovalov in the presence of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Thorbjørn Jagland and of Federal Councillor Widmer-Schlumpf deposited the ratification instrument. Protocol 14 will therefore enter into force on 1 June 2010".
Full text of Protocol 14 available here.
According to the Council of Europe there is a commitment to safeguarding Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law in the Member States of the Council of Europe.
For me this is as simple as A,B,C or 1,2,3.
A. Human Rights
B. Democracy
C. Rule of Law
or
1. Human Rights
2. Democracy
3. Rule of Law
Has the Council of Europe honoured its commitment in the Prisoners Votes Case, Hirst v UK(No2)?
The relevant Articles under the Convention are;
ARTICLE 52
The judgment of the Court shall be final.
ARTICLE 53
The High Contracting Parties undertake to abide by the decision of the Court in any case to which they are parties.
ARTICLE 54
The judgment of the Court shall be transmitted to the Committee of Ministers which shall supervise its execution.
The original Court judgment in Hirst v UK(No2), by the Chamber, was 30th of March 2004. However, the UK decided to appeal to the Grand Chamber and this judgment was on 6th of October 2005.
Meanwhile, the UK general election was held on Thursday, 5th of May 2005.
The Council of Europe celebrated its 60th anniversary on 5th of May 2009.
But, the convicted prisoners in the UK are in no mood for celebrating because between the UK and the Council of Europe they feel that they have been let down in relation to their human right to vote, are excluded from democracy and the rule of law is not being applied to their situation. Therefore, lawyers and reform groups are advocating the next step.
"Rule 11 *
Infringement Proceedings
1. When, in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 4, of the Convention, the Committee of Ministers considers that a High Contracting Party refuses to abide by a final judgment in a case to which it is party, it may, after serving formal notice on that Party and by decision adopted by a majority vote of two thirds of the representatives entitled to sit on the Committee, refer to the Court the question whether that Party has failed to fulfil its obligation.
2. Infringement proceedings should be brought only in exceptional circumstances. They shall not be initiated unless formal notice of the Committee’s intention to bring such proceedings has been given to the High Contracting Party concerned. Such formal notice shall be given ultimately six months before the lodging of proceedings, unless the Committee decides otherwise, and shall take the form of an interim resolution. This resolution shall be adopted by a majority vote of two-thirds of the representatives entitled to sit on the Committee.
3. The referral decision of the matter to the Court shall take the form of an interim resolution. It shall be reasoned and concisely reflect the views of the High Contracting Party concerned.
4. The Committee of Ministers shall be represented before the Court by its Chair unless the Committee decides upon another form of representation. This decision shall be taken by a two-thirds majority of the representatives casting a vote and a majority of the representatives entitled to sit on the Committee.
Note * Rules 10 and 11 concern the implementation of Article 16 of Protocol No. 14 to the European Convention of Human Rights and consequently will only become applicable once the Protocol enters into force".
"On Thursday, just before the opening of the Ministerial Conference, the Russian Minister of Justice Alexander Konovalov in the presence of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe Thorbjørn Jagland and of Federal Councillor Widmer-Schlumpf deposited the ratification instrument. Protocol 14 will therefore enter into force on 1 June 2010".
Full text of Protocol 14 available here.
Foreign inmates await deportation from Dorchester jail
Foreign inmates await deportation from Dorchester jail
A quarter of prisoners in a Dorset jail are foreign nationals who despite completing their sentences have yet to be deported, a report has revealed.
Dorchester Prison was named in the final report of Dame Anne Owers, the Chief Inspector of Prisons.
Dame Anne, who is stepping down, raised concerns about the number of foreign inmates still in jail at the end of their sentences.
A quarter of prisoners in a Dorset jail are foreign nationals who despite completing their sentences have yet to be deported, a report has revealed.
Dorchester Prison was named in the final report of Dame Anne Owers, the Chief Inspector of Prisons.
Dame Anne, who is stepping down, raised concerns about the number of foreign inmates still in jail at the end of their sentences.
Prisons 'instability risk', chief inspector warns
Prisons 'instability risk', chief inspector warns
Jails in England and Wales could become more unstable because of budget cuts and a rising population, the chief inspector of prisons has warned.
By Dominic Casciani
BBC News
Dame Anne Owers, who is stepping down, said there had been improvements over her nine years monitoring jails.
But mounting pressures on the system compromised successful rehabilitation.
In her final annual report, Dame Anne also raised concerns about the number of foreign inmates still being held in jail at the end of their sentences.
Over the course of nine years, Dame Anne's reports have warned of impending crises, including overcrowding and the foreign prisoners row that led to the 2006 sacking of Charles Clarke as home secretary.
If the government does not back down on the Prisoners Votes Case, I can see the risk of instability in prisons increasing to the point where several jails may suffer from riots.
Jails in England and Wales could become more unstable because of budget cuts and a rising population, the chief inspector of prisons has warned.
By Dominic Casciani
BBC News
Dame Anne Owers, who is stepping down, said there had been improvements over her nine years monitoring jails.
But mounting pressures on the system compromised successful rehabilitation.
In her final annual report, Dame Anne also raised concerns about the number of foreign inmates still being held in jail at the end of their sentences.
Over the course of nine years, Dame Anne's reports have warned of impending crises, including overcrowding and the foreign prisoners row that led to the 2006 sacking of Charles Clarke as home secretary.
If the government does not back down on the Prisoners Votes Case, I can see the risk of instability in prisons increasing to the point where several jails may suffer from riots.
Ali Dizaei assaulted in prison
Ali Dizaei assaulted in prison
Jailed police commander had slop bucket poured over his head before being punched unconscious
Metropolitan police officer Ali Dizaei was attacked in prison and is now in seclusion. Photograph: Lewis Whyld/PA
Shamed police commander Ali Dizaei was assaulted while in prison, sources said today.
The senior Metropolitan police officer is serving a four-year jail sentence for assaulting and falsely arresting a young businessman before trying to frame him.
Another inmate at HMP Edmunds Hill, Suffolk poured a slop bucket over Dizaei's head on Monday, the Daily Mirror reported, and the former police officer was then punched in the face and knocked out.
The newspaper said the former police commander Dizaei was only moved to the jail on Friday amid fears for his safety, and is now in even safer quarters.
Dizaei was convicted earlier this month for his treatment of Waad al-Baghdadi, 24, and branded a "criminal in uniform" by the chairman of the Independent Police Complaints Commission, Nick Hardwick.
Dizaei could be officially sacked within weeks after Scotland Yard disciplinary proceedings are complete. He is appealing against his conviction.
A justice ministry spokeswoman said: "A prisoner at HMP Edmunds Hill was assaulted. Staff intervened and he was moved to a place of safety."
Officer down, back up needed...
Jailed police commander had slop bucket poured over his head before being punched unconscious
Metropolitan police officer Ali Dizaei was attacked in prison and is now in seclusion. Photograph: Lewis Whyld/PAShamed police commander Ali Dizaei was assaulted while in prison, sources said today.
The senior Metropolitan police officer is serving a four-year jail sentence for assaulting and falsely arresting a young businessman before trying to frame him.
Another inmate at HMP Edmunds Hill, Suffolk poured a slop bucket over Dizaei's head on Monday, the Daily Mirror reported, and the former police officer was then punched in the face and knocked out.
The newspaper said the former police commander Dizaei was only moved to the jail on Friday amid fears for his safety, and is now in even safer quarters.
Dizaei was convicted earlier this month for his treatment of Waad al-Baghdadi, 24, and branded a "criminal in uniform" by the chairman of the Independent Police Complaints Commission, Nick Hardwick.
Dizaei could be officially sacked within weeks after Scotland Yard disciplinary proceedings are complete. He is appealing against his conviction.
A justice ministry spokeswoman said: "A prisoner at HMP Edmunds Hill was assaulted. Staff intervened and he was moved to a place of safety."
Officer down, back up needed...
Convict digs her way out of Dutch prison with a spoon
Convict digs her way out of Dutch prison with a spoon
A violent criminal used a spoon to dig her way out of a Dutch prison, officials said on Tuesday.
The 35-year-old woman, held for an unspecified "violent crime", fled on Saturday night through a tunnel she had dug with a spoon, Wim de Bruin, a prosecution spokesman, told AFP.
The tunnel linked the inside of the prison in Breda, in the southern Netherlands, to the outside world, he said, without specifying if it started in the woman's cell.
Jochgem van Opstal, a spokesman for the justice ministry, would not say what sentence the woman was serving or for what specific crime. She was still on the run on Tuesday.
She would have had a job in this country because prisoners are only allowed plastic cutlery!
A violent criminal used a spoon to dig her way out of a Dutch prison, officials said on Tuesday.
The 35-year-old woman, held for an unspecified "violent crime", fled on Saturday night through a tunnel she had dug with a spoon, Wim de Bruin, a prosecution spokesman, told AFP.
The tunnel linked the inside of the prison in Breda, in the southern Netherlands, to the outside world, he said, without specifying if it started in the woman's cell.
Jochgem van Opstal, a spokesman for the justice ministry, would not say what sentence the woman was serving or for what specific crime. She was still on the run on Tuesday.
She would have had a job in this country because prisoners are only allowed plastic cutlery!
Council of Europe in brief
Council of Europe in brief
Our objectives
The primary aim of the Council of Europe is to create a common democratic and legal area throughout the whole of the continent, ensuring respect for its fundamental values: human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
Human Rights... Democracy... Rule of Law
These values are the foundations of a tolerant and civilised society and indispensable for European stability, economic growth and social cohesion. On the basis of these fundamental values, we try to find shared solutions to major problems such as terrorism, organised crime and corruption, cybercrime, bioethics and cloning, violence against children and women, and trafficking in human beings. Co-operation between all member states is the only way to solve the major problems facing society today.
Objectives:
- to protect human rights, pluralist democracy and the rule of law;
- to promote awareness and encourage the development of Europe's cultural identity and diversity;
- to find common solutions to the challenges facing European society;
- to consolidate democratic stability in Europe by backing political, legislative and constitutional reform
The current Council of Europe's political mandate was defined by the third Summit of Heads of State and Government, held in Warsaw in May 2005. More information
Our objectives
The primary aim of the Council of Europe is to create a common democratic and legal area throughout the whole of the continent, ensuring respect for its fundamental values: human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
Human Rights... Democracy... Rule of Law
These values are the foundations of a tolerant and civilised society and indispensable for European stability, economic growth and social cohesion. On the basis of these fundamental values, we try to find shared solutions to major problems such as terrorism, organised crime and corruption, cybercrime, bioethics and cloning, violence against children and women, and trafficking in human beings. Co-operation between all member states is the only way to solve the major problems facing society today.
Objectives:
- to protect human rights, pluralist democracy and the rule of law;
- to promote awareness and encourage the development of Europe's cultural identity and diversity;
- to find common solutions to the challenges facing European society;
- to consolidate democratic stability in Europe by backing political, legislative and constitutional reform
The current Council of Europe's political mandate was defined by the third Summit of Heads of State and Government, held in Warsaw in May 2005. More information
Winston Churchill: The UK's first European
Winston Churchill: The UK's first European
“The dangers threatening us are great but great too is our strength, and there is no reason why we should not succeed in achieving our aims and establishing the structure of this united Europe whose moral concepts will be able to win the respect and recognition of mankind, and whose physical strength will be such that no one will dare to hold up its peaceful journey towards the future” (Winston Churchill, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, 12 August 1949, Strasbourg. One of the founding fathers of the Council of Europe).
Winston Churchill's speech in full:
"Beware! I am going to speak in French.
In this ancient city still scarred by the wounds of war, we are meeting to set up an assembly which we hope will one day be the parliament of Europe. We have taken the first step and it is the first step that counts. This magnificent gathering of the people of Strasbourg was summoned by the European Movement to show the world what strength lies in the idea of a united Europe, what force it has, not only in the minds of political thinkers but also in the hearts of the great mass of people in all the countries of Europe where the peoples are free to express their opinion.
I feel encouraged but also astonished by the remarkable results we have achieved in so little time. It is barely more than a year ago that, at our congress in The Hague, we asked for a European assembly to be set up. Public opinion had to be mobilised in order to persuade power¬ful governments to turn our requests into realities. Serious hesitations had to be overcome.
But we also have on our side, with us, many friends of this great cause of a united Europe, including friends who wield ministerial power. None of these friends has done more for the European Movement than Mr Spaak who, for a long time, has been the champion of a European parliament and who here today, in this city, was unanimously elected its first president.
We are meeting here in this new Assembly not as representatives of our different countries or different political parties but as Europeans marching forward, hand in hand, if necessary shoulder to shoulder, in order to revive the former glories of Europe and enable this illustrious continent to regain in a world organisation its place as an independent member, able to look after itself. That primary and sacred fidelity which everyone owes to his own country is not difficult to reconcile with this broader feeling of European camaraderie. On the contrary, it will be found that all legitimate interests tally harmoniously and that each of us will serve our countries' real interest and security better if we broaden • our feeling both of common citizenship and sovereignty. And if we encapsulate in that feeling the whole of this continent of states and nations which share the same way of living.
These principles which govern us are defined in the Constitution of the United Nations where Europe should be a vigorous and leading element ; these principles are also set out in general terms in the Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed by the United Nations in Geneva. Therefore we shall not only find the road to rebirth and prosperity in Europe but, at the same time, protect ourselves against any risk of being overrun, crushed by whatever form of totalitarian tyranny, be it the detested domination of the nazis whom we have swept away or any other kind of despotism.
As far as I am concerned I am the enemy of no race and no nation in the world. It is not against a race, it is not against any nation that we are meeting. It is against tyranny in all forms. Tyranny is always the same regardless of its false promises, regardless of the name it adopts, regard¬less of the disguises in which it dresses its henchmen. But if we wish to conquer our supreme reward, we must thrust away every hindrance and become our own masters. We must rise above those passions which have ravaged Europe and turned it into ruins. We must put an end to our old quarrels; we must renounce territorial ambi¬tions ; national rivalries must become a creative emulation in every area where we can render the most genuine services to our common cause.
Furthermore, we must take all of the necessary measures and precautions in order to be certain that we will have the power and that we will have the time to achieve that transformation of Europe in which the European Assembly, now effectively meeting in Strasbourg, has such a great role to play. It will only be able to play that role if it shows that it possesses those qualities of common sense, tolerance, independence and, above all, courage without which nothing great can be achieved in this world.
Finally I ask for the help of this great gathering of the citizens of Strasbourg; you are part of these enormous masses of people whom we claim to represent and whose rights and interests it is our duty to defend; there are in Europe on both sides of the iron curtain millions of simple homes whose hearts are with us. Will they ever be given a chance to prosper and flourish ? Will they ever live in security ? Will they ever be able to enjoy the simple joys and freedoms that God and nature have granted them ? Will the man honestly earning his bread ever be able to raise healthy and happy children in the hope of better days to come? Will he ever be free from fear, the fear of foreign invasion, the fear of the explosion of bombs and shells, the fear of the loud marching of enemy patrols and above all - and this is the worst of all - the fear of a knock at the door by the political police, coming to take away a father or brother from the normal protection of law and justice - whereas every day through a single spontaneous effort of his will that man, that European, could awake from that nightmare and stand up free and virile in the light of day?
In our long history we have triumphed over the dangers of religious and dynastic wars; after thirty years of fighting I am confident that we have reached the end of nationalist wars. After all our victories and all our suffering are we now going to slide into a final chaos, in the ideological wars unleashed among us by barbaric, criminal oligarchies, prepared by the agitators of the fifth column infiltrating and conspiring in so many countries?
No, I am certain that it is within our powers to overcome the dangers still before us, if we so wish. Our hopes and our work point to an era of peace, prosperity and abundance and the inexhaustible wealth and genius of Europe will turn it once again into the very source and inspi¬ration of the world's life. In all of this we advance with the support of the powerful republic across the Atlantic and the sovereign states which are members of the empire and commonwealth of Britannic nations. The dangers threatening us are great but great too is our strength, and there is no reason why we should not succeed in achieving our aims and establishing the structure of this united Europe whose moral concepts will be able to win the respect and recognition of mankind, and whose physical strength will be such that no one will dare to hold up its peaceful journey towards the future". © Council of Europe
Ernest Bevin
United Kingdom Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
5 May 1949
"We are witnessing today the establishment of a common democratic institution on this ancient continent of Europe".
His speech:
"Gentlemen, We have met together now for the ceremony of signature of the Statute of the Council of Europe, and of the agreement concerning the establishment of the preparatory commission.
Like the rest of my colleagues I want to express my feeling that this is a truly historic occasion. This Statute which we are signing today is the result of many months of friendly negotiations between ten of the principal countries of Western Europe. It took shape in Paris during the discussions at the end of last year under the chairmanship of that distinguished French statesman Monsieur Herriot, and it has been continued in London by the diplomatic representatives of the ten countries. Now it has been put into final shape in this treaty. This agreement lays the foundations of something new and hopeful in European life. We are witnessing today the establishment of a common democratic institution on this ancient continent of Europe".
© Council of Europe
The European National Anthem
The British Bull Dog spirit which became European wine.
I'll drink to that.
“The dangers threatening us are great but great too is our strength, and there is no reason why we should not succeed in achieving our aims and establishing the structure of this united Europe whose moral concepts will be able to win the respect and recognition of mankind, and whose physical strength will be such that no one will dare to hold up its peaceful journey towards the future” (Winston Churchill, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, 12 August 1949, Strasbourg. One of the founding fathers of the Council of Europe).
Winston Churchill's speech in full:
"Beware! I am going to speak in French.
In this ancient city still scarred by the wounds of war, we are meeting to set up an assembly which we hope will one day be the parliament of Europe. We have taken the first step and it is the first step that counts. This magnificent gathering of the people of Strasbourg was summoned by the European Movement to show the world what strength lies in the idea of a united Europe, what force it has, not only in the minds of political thinkers but also in the hearts of the great mass of people in all the countries of Europe where the peoples are free to express their opinion.
I feel encouraged but also astonished by the remarkable results we have achieved in so little time. It is barely more than a year ago that, at our congress in The Hague, we asked for a European assembly to be set up. Public opinion had to be mobilised in order to persuade power¬ful governments to turn our requests into realities. Serious hesitations had to be overcome.
But we also have on our side, with us, many friends of this great cause of a united Europe, including friends who wield ministerial power. None of these friends has done more for the European Movement than Mr Spaak who, for a long time, has been the champion of a European parliament and who here today, in this city, was unanimously elected its first president.
We are meeting here in this new Assembly not as representatives of our different countries or different political parties but as Europeans marching forward, hand in hand, if necessary shoulder to shoulder, in order to revive the former glories of Europe and enable this illustrious continent to regain in a world organisation its place as an independent member, able to look after itself. That primary and sacred fidelity which everyone owes to his own country is not difficult to reconcile with this broader feeling of European camaraderie. On the contrary, it will be found that all legitimate interests tally harmoniously and that each of us will serve our countries' real interest and security better if we broaden • our feeling both of common citizenship and sovereignty. And if we encapsulate in that feeling the whole of this continent of states and nations which share the same way of living.
These principles which govern us are defined in the Constitution of the United Nations where Europe should be a vigorous and leading element ; these principles are also set out in general terms in the Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed by the United Nations in Geneva. Therefore we shall not only find the road to rebirth and prosperity in Europe but, at the same time, protect ourselves against any risk of being overrun, crushed by whatever form of totalitarian tyranny, be it the detested domination of the nazis whom we have swept away or any other kind of despotism.
As far as I am concerned I am the enemy of no race and no nation in the world. It is not against a race, it is not against any nation that we are meeting. It is against tyranny in all forms. Tyranny is always the same regardless of its false promises, regardless of the name it adopts, regard¬less of the disguises in which it dresses its henchmen. But if we wish to conquer our supreme reward, we must thrust away every hindrance and become our own masters. We must rise above those passions which have ravaged Europe and turned it into ruins. We must put an end to our old quarrels; we must renounce territorial ambi¬tions ; national rivalries must become a creative emulation in every area where we can render the most genuine services to our common cause.
Furthermore, we must take all of the necessary measures and precautions in order to be certain that we will have the power and that we will have the time to achieve that transformation of Europe in which the European Assembly, now effectively meeting in Strasbourg, has such a great role to play. It will only be able to play that role if it shows that it possesses those qualities of common sense, tolerance, independence and, above all, courage without which nothing great can be achieved in this world.
Finally I ask for the help of this great gathering of the citizens of Strasbourg; you are part of these enormous masses of people whom we claim to represent and whose rights and interests it is our duty to defend; there are in Europe on both sides of the iron curtain millions of simple homes whose hearts are with us. Will they ever be given a chance to prosper and flourish ? Will they ever live in security ? Will they ever be able to enjoy the simple joys and freedoms that God and nature have granted them ? Will the man honestly earning his bread ever be able to raise healthy and happy children in the hope of better days to come? Will he ever be free from fear, the fear of foreign invasion, the fear of the explosion of bombs and shells, the fear of the loud marching of enemy patrols and above all - and this is the worst of all - the fear of a knock at the door by the political police, coming to take away a father or brother from the normal protection of law and justice - whereas every day through a single spontaneous effort of his will that man, that European, could awake from that nightmare and stand up free and virile in the light of day?
In our long history we have triumphed over the dangers of religious and dynastic wars; after thirty years of fighting I am confident that we have reached the end of nationalist wars. After all our victories and all our suffering are we now going to slide into a final chaos, in the ideological wars unleashed among us by barbaric, criminal oligarchies, prepared by the agitators of the fifth column infiltrating and conspiring in so many countries?
No, I am certain that it is within our powers to overcome the dangers still before us, if we so wish. Our hopes and our work point to an era of peace, prosperity and abundance and the inexhaustible wealth and genius of Europe will turn it once again into the very source and inspi¬ration of the world's life. In all of this we advance with the support of the powerful republic across the Atlantic and the sovereign states which are members of the empire and commonwealth of Britannic nations. The dangers threatening us are great but great too is our strength, and there is no reason why we should not succeed in achieving our aims and establishing the structure of this united Europe whose moral concepts will be able to win the respect and recognition of mankind, and whose physical strength will be such that no one will dare to hold up its peaceful journey towards the future". © Council of Europe
Ernest Bevin
United Kingdom Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
5 May 1949
"We are witnessing today the establishment of a common democratic institution on this ancient continent of Europe".
His speech:
"Gentlemen, We have met together now for the ceremony of signature of the Statute of the Council of Europe, and of the agreement concerning the establishment of the preparatory commission.
Like the rest of my colleagues I want to express my feeling that this is a truly historic occasion. This Statute which we are signing today is the result of many months of friendly negotiations between ten of the principal countries of Western Europe. It took shape in Paris during the discussions at the end of last year under the chairmanship of that distinguished French statesman Monsieur Herriot, and it has been continued in London by the diplomatic representatives of the ten countries. Now it has been put into final shape in this treaty. This agreement lays the foundations of something new and hopeful in European life. We are witnessing today the establishment of a common democratic institution on this ancient continent of Europe".
© Council of Europe
The European National Anthem
The British Bull Dog spirit which became European wine.
I'll drink to that.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Boy criminal in Essex remanded in to secure custody
Boy criminal in Essex remanded in to secure custody
A 12-year-old boy found guilty of more than 30 offences in Essex has been remanded in secure accommodation.
Youth workers told a magistrates' court in Witham the youngster, who cannot be named, could not be "contained".
He is being held in local authority accommodation until a court decides on a suitable punishment next month.
An application was made to name him as a threat to the local community but the court decided he was "vulnerable" and this was not in the public interest.
A 12-year-old boy found guilty of more than 30 offences in Essex has been remanded in secure accommodation.
Youth workers told a magistrates' court in Witham the youngster, who cannot be named, could not be "contained".
He is being held in local authority accommodation until a court decides on a suitable punishment next month.
An application was made to name him as a threat to the local community but the court decided he was "vulnerable" and this was not in the public interest.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Poem or song?
Poem or song?
The first lines go thus...
Did I steal a mink stole?
The man on the dole,
who calls a cab to pick up his coal.
He used to go
with Hawaii 5 O
they're not as good as 57 57 57
diffence is hell from heaven.
It's said it's never dull
in Hull
like hell is it
council is full of shhhhh!
The first lines go thus...
Did I steal a mink stole?
The man on the dole,
who calls a cab to pick up his coal.
He used to go
with Hawaii 5 O
they're not as good as 57 57 57
diffence is hell from heaven.
It's said it's never dull
in Hull
like hell is it
council is full of shhhhh!
Dads behind bars: 'I wrote to apologise to my son'
Dads behind bars: 'I wrote to apologise to my son'
At HMP Durham, prisoners can join a families workshop to see their children and teach them how to be better fathers
Check out the Prisoners Families Voices link in my side bar.
At HMP Durham, prisoners can join a families workshop to see their children and teach them how to be better fathers
Check out the Prisoners Families Voices link in my side bar.
BMW: Love at first sight...
BMW: Love at first sight...
There is this...
Then there was mine...
In snow it was a devil for slip sliding away!
There is this...
Then there was mine...
In snow it was a devil for slip sliding away!
Jack Straw: Is he knee-jerk policy making?
Jack Straw: Is he knee-jerk policy making?
Early release scheme scrapped as election looms
A prisoner release scheme that has seen almost 80,000 criminals rel let out early will be scrapped next month, Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, said.
Whatever.
I would have thought that Jack Straw would have more serious problems to sort out in the run up to the general election...
Early release scheme scrapped as election looms
A prisoner release scheme that has seen almost 80,000 criminals rel let out early will be scrapped next month, Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, said.
Whatever.
I would have thought that Jack Straw would have more serious problems to sort out in the run up to the general election...
Dog not man's best friend
Dog not man's best friend
Man's dog turns him in to police
A German man on the run from police was given away by his own dog, which revealed its master's hiding place by wagging its tail while standing next to the small cupboard he was cowering in, authorities said on Monday.
LOL.
Not so funny...
Police dog handler convicted over animal deaths
Man's dog turns him in to police
A German man on the run from police was given away by his own dog, which revealed its master's hiding place by wagging its tail while standing next to the small cupboard he was cowering in, authorities said on Monday.
LOL.
Not so funny...
Police dog handler convicted over animal deaths
The elephant in the room
The elephant in the room
According to Foulkes:
“The basic and traditional functions of the state are those of securing the community against external aggression and internal strife and of keeping itself going out of taxation…In addition, the need to attempt to secure human rights, as in the area of racial and sexual discrimination, has led to the creation of institutions and a body of relevant law”.
It maybe that by focusing too much on the potential for external aggression, the UK has been coming apart from the inside. Internal strife has brought down the UK. It has fallen victim to being a hostage to fortune.
There is a distinction between anybody, in a particular situation, saying there is a need to secure human rights, and the Council of Europe saying a Member State must ensure human rights for its citizens. The former is a plea, whereas the latter is a directive.
The discrimination in this case is against a section of the public with the recognised status being prisoner. The institutions created being the Council of Europe, European Court of Human Rights, Committee of Ministers, European Court of Justice and the European Union. Since the Lisbon Treaty, the Council of Europe and EU have now been brought under one umbrella. It is empire building. Whilst the UK continues to dish out medals and other honours associated with the long bygone days of the British Empire, the European Empire has been busy empowering itself and forming into the United States of Europe. Politics is about power. The body of relevant law being international law, and European law. The Court exercises jurisdiction in these matters. English law still has its place. However, it has to be remembered that whilst the British Empire only had one head, hydra-plus the Council of Europe has 47 heads. English law is no longer supreme; its jurisdiction stays at home. The UK was not conquered, it surrendered.
According to Foulkes:
“Administrative law is concerned with public administration; public administration operates through institutions. A study of administrative law must therefore include some knowledge of the complex of institutions that public administration is. The institutions exist to exercise powers and duties. Administrative law is therefore concerned with the way powers are acquired, where the authorities get their power from, and what is the nature of those powers”.
A case study.
The Prisoners Votes Case (Hirst v UK(No2)).
Europe is not over there any longer, it’s over here. Call it mission creep, or whatever you like, the invasion was a long time ago and like the Vikings intend to settle down here. Europe seeks to educate the UK. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. A lot of knowledge informs sound judgement, and judgments. The UK soil remains UK soil. The Treaties the UK signed surrendered sovereignty.
Supremacy (sovereignty) of Parliament. In the UK, this principle of English law is tops. When the UK joined Europe, it was based on a give and take principle. One of those things we gave away was the UK Parliament being supreme. The UK conceded power and jurisdiction to Europe on matters with a European element. If Europe says jump, the UK asks how high and jumps to it. Or should do if it knows what’s good for it. If the UK doesn’t know, Europe will educate the UK. This is not a debate about the benefits or losses of the UK going into Europe. Rather, this is an account of the present state of affairs. Prisoners, at taxpayers expense, have been ‘Going to Europe’ for sometime now. The Prisoners Votes Case being just one of many; each alleging human rights violations by the UK. Prisoners became victims and sought redress from the Court. This is called the Individual v the State. And not about the victims of the prisoners. European law requires that the issues be relevant to the proceedings. Quite frankly, public opinion holds no sway. The UK government had argued it formed policy according to public opinion. The Court dismissed this as a valid line of argument, stating that so basic a human right as the right to vote cannot be removed purely on the basis of what might offend public opinion. Human rights extend to prisoners; dehumanising civil deaths are a thing of the past. The UK has to get down out of the trees and take a giant leap into civilisation. Behaving ape like is very primitive. A primitive race which dehumanises rule breakers and expels them from the tribe, should be a thing of the past. Europe leads the way forward.
(To be continued)
According to Foulkes:
“The basic and traditional functions of the state are those of securing the community against external aggression and internal strife and of keeping itself going out of taxation…In addition, the need to attempt to secure human rights, as in the area of racial and sexual discrimination, has led to the creation of institutions and a body of relevant law”.
It maybe that by focusing too much on the potential for external aggression, the UK has been coming apart from the inside. Internal strife has brought down the UK. It has fallen victim to being a hostage to fortune.
There is a distinction between anybody, in a particular situation, saying there is a need to secure human rights, and the Council of Europe saying a Member State must ensure human rights for its citizens. The former is a plea, whereas the latter is a directive.
The discrimination in this case is against a section of the public with the recognised status being prisoner. The institutions created being the Council of Europe, European Court of Human Rights, Committee of Ministers, European Court of Justice and the European Union. Since the Lisbon Treaty, the Council of Europe and EU have now been brought under one umbrella. It is empire building. Whilst the UK continues to dish out medals and other honours associated with the long bygone days of the British Empire, the European Empire has been busy empowering itself and forming into the United States of Europe. Politics is about power. The body of relevant law being international law, and European law. The Court exercises jurisdiction in these matters. English law still has its place. However, it has to be remembered that whilst the British Empire only had one head, hydra-plus the Council of Europe has 47 heads. English law is no longer supreme; its jurisdiction stays at home. The UK was not conquered, it surrendered.
According to Foulkes:
“Administrative law is concerned with public administration; public administration operates through institutions. A study of administrative law must therefore include some knowledge of the complex of institutions that public administration is. The institutions exist to exercise powers and duties. Administrative law is therefore concerned with the way powers are acquired, where the authorities get their power from, and what is the nature of those powers”.
A case study.
The Prisoners Votes Case (Hirst v UK(No2)).
Europe is not over there any longer, it’s over here. Call it mission creep, or whatever you like, the invasion was a long time ago and like the Vikings intend to settle down here. Europe seeks to educate the UK. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. A lot of knowledge informs sound judgement, and judgments. The UK soil remains UK soil. The Treaties the UK signed surrendered sovereignty.
Supremacy (sovereignty) of Parliament. In the UK, this principle of English law is tops. When the UK joined Europe, it was based on a give and take principle. One of those things we gave away was the UK Parliament being supreme. The UK conceded power and jurisdiction to Europe on matters with a European element. If Europe says jump, the UK asks how high and jumps to it. Or should do if it knows what’s good for it. If the UK doesn’t know, Europe will educate the UK. This is not a debate about the benefits or losses of the UK going into Europe. Rather, this is an account of the present state of affairs. Prisoners, at taxpayers expense, have been ‘Going to Europe’ for sometime now. The Prisoners Votes Case being just one of many; each alleging human rights violations by the UK. Prisoners became victims and sought redress from the Court. This is called the Individual v the State. And not about the victims of the prisoners. European law requires that the issues be relevant to the proceedings. Quite frankly, public opinion holds no sway. The UK government had argued it formed policy according to public opinion. The Court dismissed this as a valid line of argument, stating that so basic a human right as the right to vote cannot be removed purely on the basis of what might offend public opinion. Human rights extend to prisoners; dehumanising civil deaths are a thing of the past. The UK has to get down out of the trees and take a giant leap into civilisation. Behaving ape like is very primitive. A primitive race which dehumanises rule breakers and expels them from the tribe, should be a thing of the past. Europe leads the way forward.
(To be continued)
Do you want to know a secret?
Do you want to know a secret?
I'm sat, in my view, on the biggest story of the forthcoming general election.
This big story is separate from this story which has to be put on hold until the 1st of March. In the latter case, a politician's career may well be in jeopardy. For him, it may seem like the end of the world. But in the grander scheme of things, it is relatively minor.
I think people have a natural inclination to pass on information they have heard in secret. Which may explain why there is such a thing as a News embargo. Being a blogger I am just the same as a journalist in the MainStreamMedia, when a story is unearthed the idea is to rush and publish before anyone else gets wind of it. On the one hand is the publish and be damned approach, and on the other is the obligation to honour an embargo. There is another element, public interest. Whilst bloggers may not be under the same restriction as the MSM in relation to embargos, there is still doing the honourable thing, especially when the request is supported by genuine reasons for holding off spilling the beans.
Now the main story. I am still piecing it together, and will publish it as soon as I am ready. With this story, I am fully in control.
All I do know is, when the elephant takes a shit it will leave the biggest mess Parliament has had to clean up since the time of King Charles the First. Without doubt we are heading for a constitutional crisis which involves the three arms of the State: Executive, Judiciary, and Parliament.
I'm sat, in my view, on the biggest story of the forthcoming general election.
This big story is separate from this story which has to be put on hold until the 1st of March. In the latter case, a politician's career may well be in jeopardy. For him, it may seem like the end of the world. But in the grander scheme of things, it is relatively minor.
I think people have a natural inclination to pass on information they have heard in secret. Which may explain why there is such a thing as a News embargo. Being a blogger I am just the same as a journalist in the MainStreamMedia, when a story is unearthed the idea is to rush and publish before anyone else gets wind of it. On the one hand is the publish and be damned approach, and on the other is the obligation to honour an embargo. There is another element, public interest. Whilst bloggers may not be under the same restriction as the MSM in relation to embargos, there is still doing the honourable thing, especially when the request is supported by genuine reasons for holding off spilling the beans.
Now the main story. I am still piecing it together, and will publish it as soon as I am ready. With this story, I am fully in control.
All I do know is, when the elephant takes a shit it will leave the biggest mess Parliament has had to clean up since the time of King Charles the First. Without doubt we are heading for a constitutional crisis which involves the three arms of the State: Executive, Judiciary, and Parliament.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Alan Johnson sticks up two fingers to the McCanns
Alan Johnson sticks up two fingers to the McCanns
Kate and Gerry McCann - The child killers of Rothley
"Last week it was disclosed that Kate and Gerry, 41-year-old doctors from Rothley, Leics, have had a private meeting with Home Secretary Alan Johnson [pictured below] to request a review of the evidence".
Alan Johnson gives his response to the McCanns request to waste police time
Following this rebuff, "KATE and Gerry McCann have asked David Cameron to help find their daughter Madeleine after a private emotional meeting with the Tory leader".
David Cameron has two children.
The McCanns have two children.
David Cameron did have three childen, sadly one died and there were no suspicious circumstances.
The McCanns did have three children, one is missing, presumed dead, in very suspicious circumstances.
In other news, Clarence Mitchell, former spokesman for the McCanns, is seeking to become elected as a Tory MP. Pass the sick bucket...
Kate and Gerry McCann - The child killers of Rothley"Last week it was disclosed that Kate and Gerry, 41-year-old doctors from Rothley, Leics, have had a private meeting with Home Secretary Alan Johnson [pictured below] to request a review of the evidence".
Alan Johnson gives his response to the McCanns request to waste police time
Following this rebuff, "KATE and Gerry McCann have asked David Cameron to help find their daughter Madeleine after a private emotional meeting with the Tory leader".
David Cameron has two children.
The McCanns have two children.
David Cameron did have three childen, sadly one died and there were no suspicious circumstances.
The McCanns did have three children, one is missing, presumed dead, in very suspicious circumstances.
In other news, Clarence Mitchell, former spokesman for the McCanns, is seeking to become elected as a Tory MP. Pass the sick bucket...
Manchester police chief admits snowballing mistakes
Manchester police chief admits snowballing mistakes
The Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police has criticised some of his officers for recording snowball throwing as "serious violent crime".
Peter Fahy said the officers concerned had failed to show any common sense.
During last month's cold spell, six snowball-throwing incidents were logged as serious violent crimes, although no-one was injured or arrested.
The classification is more often given to offences such as murder, rape and causing grievous bodily harm.
A spokesman for the force said the six incidents had been misreported by the officers and since rectified.
The Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police has criticised some of his officers for recording snowball throwing as "serious violent crime".
Peter Fahy said the officers concerned had failed to show any common sense.
During last month's cold spell, six snowball-throwing incidents were logged as serious violent crimes, although no-one was injured or arrested.
The classification is more often given to offences such as murder, rape and causing grievous bodily harm.
A spokesman for the force said the six incidents had been misreported by the officers and since rectified.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Labour: A future fair for all
Labour: A future fair for all
Labour's campaign slogan will be "A future fair for all"
This will make more sense to me if it includes votes for prisoners which is only fair, and the term all is inclusive of prisoners. Then the creaking old penal system can be reformed and there would be a future for prisoners as opposed to forcing them to live in the past.
Labour's campaign slogan will be "A future fair for all"
This will make more sense to me if it includes votes for prisoners which is only fair, and the term all is inclusive of prisoners. Then the creaking old penal system can be reformed and there would be a future for prisoners as opposed to forcing them to live in the past.
Friday, February 19, 2010
McCanns: First they kill Madeleine then kill freedom of expression
McCanns: First they kill Madeleine then kill freedom of expression
I was very disappointed to learn that a Portuguese judge has ruled that freedom of expression is dead. It cannot even be claimed that freedom of expession was abducted. And once again the McCanns have been involved in a mysterious death.
The McCanns claim that the Truth of the Lie will kill the search for Madeleine. The McCanns claim that they only searched the apartment on 3 May 2007. And yet, they wanted others to carry out a world wide search? They claimed that their first priority is to find Madeleine. Is that why they did not search further afield? Perhaps, it was another priority which led to them not wishing to leave the apartment?
Then there was the claim by the McCanns that there had been a break-in, to explain Madeleine's disappearance. But, there was no break-in. Instead, there was a lie by the McCanns. No search + lie. And it is searching for answers to these questions a Portuguese judge has decided is against the law. No search + lie + no abduction = the McCanns have questions to answer in relation to their guilt.
I was very disappointed to learn that a Portuguese judge has ruled that freedom of expression is dead. It cannot even be claimed that freedom of expession was abducted. And once again the McCanns have been involved in a mysterious death.
The McCanns claim that the Truth of the Lie will kill the search for Madeleine. The McCanns claim that they only searched the apartment on 3 May 2007. And yet, they wanted others to carry out a world wide search? They claimed that their first priority is to find Madeleine. Is that why they did not search further afield? Perhaps, it was another priority which led to them not wishing to leave the apartment?
Then there was the claim by the McCanns that there had been a break-in, to explain Madeleine's disappearance. But, there was no break-in. Instead, there was a lie by the McCanns. No search + lie. And it is searching for answers to these questions a Portuguese judge has decided is against the law. No search + lie + no abduction = the McCanns have questions to answer in relation to their guilt.
Move along there nothing to see
Move along there nothing to see
Hug a hoodie because he's my buddy!
I was asked quite reasonably to pull a story I published awhile earlier on this blog. I wasn't subjected to an embargo, apparently others had been told about an embargo. The story could have effected plans made by the organisers of an event, so I pulled it out of respect. I published in good faith, and when the time is right I will republish the story which I believe is political dynamite in the run up to a general election.
Photo: Idea by JHL Dominic Grieve touched up by Jaycee
Hug a hoodie because he's my buddy!I was asked quite reasonably to pull a story I published awhile earlier on this blog. I wasn't subjected to an embargo, apparently others had been told about an embargo. The story could have effected plans made by the organisers of an event, so I pulled it out of respect. I published in good faith, and when the time is right I will republish the story which I believe is political dynamite in the run up to a general election.
Photo: Idea by JHL Dominic Grieve touched up by Jaycee
Thousands of prisoners 'not on DNA database'
Thousands of prisoners 'not on DNA database'
Thousands of prisoners in England and Wales may not be on the national DNA database, the Tories have claimed.
They accused the government of being more concerned about collecting the profiles of innocent people than those of convicted criminals.
The Home Office said the vast majority of inmates were on the database but it did not know the exact number.
Thousands of prisoners in England and Wales may not be on the national DNA database, the Tories have claimed.
They accused the government of being more concerned about collecting the profiles of innocent people than those of convicted criminals.
The Home Office said the vast majority of inmates were on the database but it did not know the exact number.
Jailhouselawyer on the Alan Titmarch Show
Jailhouselawyer on the Alan Titmarch Show
Nick Ferrari says he is delighted when MPs are humiliated. The Prisoners Votes Case certainly humiliates MPs. Is Nick Ferrari delighted? Not when it comes down to prisoners doing the humilation. I don't think he listens except to the sound of his own voice, because after I explained it was a case of the Individual v the State he asks the irrelevant question 'What do the victims of crimes think?'. The answer is, what does it matter what they think? The Court bases its judgment on reason and not on prejudice.
Nick Ferrari says he is delighted when MPs are humiliated. The Prisoners Votes Case certainly humiliates MPs. Is Nick Ferrari delighted? Not when it comes down to prisoners doing the humilation. I don't think he listens except to the sound of his own voice, because after I explained it was a case of the Individual v the State he asks the irrelevant question 'What do the victims of crimes think?'. The answer is, what does it matter what they think? The Court bases its judgment on reason and not on prejudice.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Should prisoners have the right to vote?
Should prisoners have the right to vote?
Prison reform groups are saying this year's general election will be illegal unless prisoners are allowed to vote
It's been a subject of debate for five years, since the European Court of Human Rights declared that inmates in the UK should be given the right to vote in elections.
For The One Show, Anita Rani asked, 'Should democracy extend to those behind bars?'
Anita met June Gillbanks. June's daughter was murdered. The killer, June's brother, now campaigns for prisoners' rights from his gaol cell. But June believes prisoners should lose their right to vote. She said "to me, he lost that right when he strangled my daughter."
Anita also spoke to John Hirst, a former prisoner who campaigns for prisoners' rights. He made the case for allowing prisoners to vote, saying: "Does the vote have anything to do with the offence, no it doesn't. Will it make that person a better person and therefore help society? Yes."
Watch the programme here from 2.37 to 8.54.
Prison reform groups are saying this year's general election will be illegal unless prisoners are allowed to vote
It's been a subject of debate for five years, since the European Court of Human Rights declared that inmates in the UK should be given the right to vote in elections.
For The One Show, Anita Rani asked, 'Should democracy extend to those behind bars?'
Anita met June Gillbanks. June's daughter was murdered. The killer, June's brother, now campaigns for prisoners' rights from his gaol cell. But June believes prisoners should lose their right to vote. She said "to me, he lost that right when he strangled my daughter."
Anita also spoke to John Hirst, a former prisoner who campaigns for prisoners' rights. He made the case for allowing prisoners to vote, saying: "Does the vote have anything to do with the offence, no it doesn't. Will it make that person a better person and therefore help society? Yes."
Watch the programme here from 2.37 to 8.54.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
The Strasbourg Court is a source of hope for many – its continued effective functioning must be guaranteed
The Strasbourg Court is a source of hope for many – its continued effective functioning must be guaranteed
By Commissioner Hammarberg
The European Court of Human Rights has been overwhelmed by the response from ordinary people all over Europe. More than fifty thousand applications were received during 2009 and the number of pending cases is now well over one hundred thousand. These figures underline the need to reform the proceedings of the Court – but above all the necessity to improve human rights protection at national level.
The main message brought by this massive inflow of cases is that the Strasbourg Court is essential to many individuals who feel that their rights have not been protected in a European state. In four out of five judgments delivered since 1959, it has found at least one violation of the Convention by the respondent state.
In order to cope, the Court has taken steps to improve its efficiency. The annual number of final judgments has more than doubled during the past decade. With the entry into force of the well-known Protocol N° 14 there will be further possibilities to streamline the procedures and strengthen the Court’s efficiency.
However, there is no doubt that further measures are needed in order to avoid the Court being drowned under its workload. It is imperative that the quality of the decisions be maintained, that judgments be delivered within a reasonable time and, above all, that they be executed fully and effectively by states concerned.
The relevance of the Court is obvious because of the concrete effects of its decisions on peoples’ lives, irrespective of their status.
However, the Court is also relevant beyond the individual cases through the fact that the European Convention on Human Rights has been incorporated into domestic law in all member states of the Council of Europe. Rulings by the Strasbourg Court thereby function as the most authoritative interpretation of that piece of national law – for all member states.
The forthcoming accession to the Convention by the European Union will add to the significance of this dimension of the system.
The key characteristic of this system is the right to individual petition – the fact that all 800 million individuals in the Council of Europe area have the right to seek justice, as a last resort, at supranational level. Human rights oriented government representatives and civil society activists in other parts of the world are studying this unique European model and draw inspiration.
To safeguard the effectiveness - and thereby the credibility - of this remarkable institution there will be a need for further reforms. One major problem is that its functioning is hampered by having to deal with many applications which are clearly inadmissible or manifestly ill-founded. In fact, no less than ninety per cent of the applications received belong to this category. This begs for more serious efforts to spread information in member states about the procedures.
Furthermore, there is a serious problem of ‘repetitive cases’. About fifty per cent of the cases declared as admissible do actually raise issues that have already been subject to the Court’s judgments. Therefore, they should really have been resolved by the respondent states within their respective national systems.
This confirms that there is a serious gap of systematic implementation of the Court judgments. These require a prompt, full and effective execution so that recurrence of similar violations is prevented. In fact, effective embeddedness of the Convention’s standards in domestic law and practice is far from being attained in a number of countries in spite of strong recommendations from the Committee of Ministers1.This is problematic as the credibility of the European human rights protection system ultimately depends on whether the standards are made effective in practice.
The discussion about the difficulties of the Strasbourg Court must to a larger extent focus on the need for prevention. The main question is not why the Court has difficulties coping, but why so many individuals feel the need to go there with their complaints.
The conclusion is that much more must be done to protect human rights at home, at domestic level. The European system can in no way act as a long-term substitute for the national systems.
In order to bridge the implementation gap, governments need to work out a systematic and holistic strategy that would ensure the full realisation of the European human rights treaties, starting of course with the Convention and the Court’s case-law. The development of a national plan for the implementation of the human rights obligations would be an ideal framework for such a systematic approach2.
* It could start with a national baseline study giving a broad and accurate picture of the current human rights situation in the country. A thorough evaluation of existing policies and practices and recognition of problematic areas would the basis. The degree of implementation of the international treaties would be assessed as well as the response to the Court decisions (including the leading judgments relating to other countries). The appointment of an inter-ministerial committee for this task – as was done in Poland and Sweden – can be very helpful.
* The next major step should be the development of a national human rights action plan to address the human rights challenges identified in the baseline study. Such plans should contain concrete activities and indicate the authorities responsible for their implementation. The activities should be coupled with time-frames and benchmarks for follow-up and evaluation. International reporting obligations should be integrated into the process.
* States should involve all stakeholders in these processes, including Ombudsmen and other national human rights structures, civil society and representatives of disadvantaged groups of people. Such an inclusive and participatory approach will contribute to the legitimacy of the plan, create shared ownership and make implementation effective.
* The implementation of action plans should be reviewed in a regular way and there should be an independent evaluation of results upon their completion. It is equally as important to assess the process, in terms of participation, inclusiveness and transparency, as it is to evaluate the end result.
* States should ensure high-level and long-term support for the action plans through the active involvement of politicians and the leadership of the authorities and agencies responsible for the plan’s implementation. Action plans stretching over national and local elections should be discussed and/or adopted by parliaments to ensure continuity.
* The human rights planning should be coordinated with the budgetary process to secure proper funding for human rights work. It is necessary to review budget proposals from a human rights perspective to inform politicians of the consequences of their decisions and to hold them accountable.
* A significant part of this policy should be to integrate human rights into the ordinary work of the public administrations and to ensure effective coordination and cooperation between the authorities at all levels by setting up networks or other fora for discussion and exchange of experiences.
* Local authorities should be encouraged to develop comprehensive local baseline studies, action plans or similar documents ensuring regular reviews of the local situation and coordinated efforts to address human rights challenges. Adequate systems should be established for monitoring the provision of health care, education or social services, whether provided by private or public actors, using the rights-based approach.
* It is essential to set up adequate systems for data collection and analysis, including data on disadvantaged groups of people. Collection of sensitive data should be voluntary and accompanied by proper safeguards to prevent the identification of individuals belonging to a particular group. Official data should be complemented with relevant information from national human rights structures and from NGOs.
* The independence of the Ombudsmen and other national human rights structures must be respected. They should have sufficient resources to fulfil their role. Consideration should be given to establishing such institutions at the regional or local level to facilitate easy access for ordinary people. These bodies, if adequately resourced, may also facilitate the establishment of national systems of information on the Convention and the Court’s procedures and make this information easily accessible for every interested individual.
* Fostering a human rights culture through the full integration of human rights in education and training as well as through awareness-raising is another major building block. It is essential that concrete and accessible language be used in all human rights education. The educational needs of public officials and other professionals who deal with the human rights of others should be assessed to ensure that they have a thorough and up-to-date knowledge of the international standards relevant to their field of competence.
A serious package of reforms along these lines would improve the protection of human rights in any country. It would respond to the fundamental principle of subsidiarity which is enshrined in the Convention. The ideal is that each individual is able to seek and receive justice at home.
Other parts of the Council of Europe – including my own office and the Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs - offer advisory services to member states in order to facilitate such systematic measures for the domestic realisation of human rights.
These efforts will only give the desired results if governments give them much higher priority than hitherto. Even so, their implementation will take some time which in turn underlines the need for immediate reforms of the Court proceedings in Strasbourg.
Indeed, this Court will never be redundant, even if a large number of cases now coming there would instead be satisfactorily resolved at national level. The wisdom of the Court will continue to be decisive in key cases when we need an authoritative interpretation of the Convention
Thomas Hammarberg
1. CM Recommendations (2004) 4, 5, 6 of 12 May 2004 as key components of the “reform package”. (back)
2. See also Commissioner’s Recommendation on systematic work for implementing human rights at the national level, CommDH (2009)3, 18/02/2009. (back)
UPDATE:
I decided to leave them the following comment...
"The Strasbourg Court is a source of hope for many – its continued effective functioning must be guaranteed"
What hope do the convicted prisoners in the UK have of voting at the next UK general election? It is 5 years since the Court decided Hirst v UK(No2). Where is the effective functioning when the Court and the Committee of Ministers and Council of Europe keeps letting the UK get away with not implementing the Court decision? Must be guaranteed? It is no good speaking the words if your actions and the actions of the UK fail to deliver upon that guarantee. Actions speak louder than words. The Association of Prisoners asks 'How do you get a court decision implemented?'.
By Commissioner Hammarberg
The European Court of Human Rights has been overwhelmed by the response from ordinary people all over Europe. More than fifty thousand applications were received during 2009 and the number of pending cases is now well over one hundred thousand. These figures underline the need to reform the proceedings of the Court – but above all the necessity to improve human rights protection at national level.
The main message brought by this massive inflow of cases is that the Strasbourg Court is essential to many individuals who feel that their rights have not been protected in a European state. In four out of five judgments delivered since 1959, it has found at least one violation of the Convention by the respondent state.
In order to cope, the Court has taken steps to improve its efficiency. The annual number of final judgments has more than doubled during the past decade. With the entry into force of the well-known Protocol N° 14 there will be further possibilities to streamline the procedures and strengthen the Court’s efficiency.
However, there is no doubt that further measures are needed in order to avoid the Court being drowned under its workload. It is imperative that the quality of the decisions be maintained, that judgments be delivered within a reasonable time and, above all, that they be executed fully and effectively by states concerned.
The relevance of the Court is obvious because of the concrete effects of its decisions on peoples’ lives, irrespective of their status.
However, the Court is also relevant beyond the individual cases through the fact that the European Convention on Human Rights has been incorporated into domestic law in all member states of the Council of Europe. Rulings by the Strasbourg Court thereby function as the most authoritative interpretation of that piece of national law – for all member states.
The forthcoming accession to the Convention by the European Union will add to the significance of this dimension of the system.
The key characteristic of this system is the right to individual petition – the fact that all 800 million individuals in the Council of Europe area have the right to seek justice, as a last resort, at supranational level. Human rights oriented government representatives and civil society activists in other parts of the world are studying this unique European model and draw inspiration.
To safeguard the effectiveness - and thereby the credibility - of this remarkable institution there will be a need for further reforms. One major problem is that its functioning is hampered by having to deal with many applications which are clearly inadmissible or manifestly ill-founded. In fact, no less than ninety per cent of the applications received belong to this category. This begs for more serious efforts to spread information in member states about the procedures.
Furthermore, there is a serious problem of ‘repetitive cases’. About fifty per cent of the cases declared as admissible do actually raise issues that have already been subject to the Court’s judgments. Therefore, they should really have been resolved by the respondent states within their respective national systems.
This confirms that there is a serious gap of systematic implementation of the Court judgments. These require a prompt, full and effective execution so that recurrence of similar violations is prevented. In fact, effective embeddedness of the Convention’s standards in domestic law and practice is far from being attained in a number of countries in spite of strong recommendations from the Committee of Ministers1.This is problematic as the credibility of the European human rights protection system ultimately depends on whether the standards are made effective in practice.
The discussion about the difficulties of the Strasbourg Court must to a larger extent focus on the need for prevention. The main question is not why the Court has difficulties coping, but why so many individuals feel the need to go there with their complaints.
The conclusion is that much more must be done to protect human rights at home, at domestic level. The European system can in no way act as a long-term substitute for the national systems.
In order to bridge the implementation gap, governments need to work out a systematic and holistic strategy that would ensure the full realisation of the European human rights treaties, starting of course with the Convention and the Court’s case-law. The development of a national plan for the implementation of the human rights obligations would be an ideal framework for such a systematic approach2.
* It could start with a national baseline study giving a broad and accurate picture of the current human rights situation in the country. A thorough evaluation of existing policies and practices and recognition of problematic areas would the basis. The degree of implementation of the international treaties would be assessed as well as the response to the Court decisions (including the leading judgments relating to other countries). The appointment of an inter-ministerial committee for this task – as was done in Poland and Sweden – can be very helpful.
* The next major step should be the development of a national human rights action plan to address the human rights challenges identified in the baseline study. Such plans should contain concrete activities and indicate the authorities responsible for their implementation. The activities should be coupled with time-frames and benchmarks for follow-up and evaluation. International reporting obligations should be integrated into the process.
* States should involve all stakeholders in these processes, including Ombudsmen and other national human rights structures, civil society and representatives of disadvantaged groups of people. Such an inclusive and participatory approach will contribute to the legitimacy of the plan, create shared ownership and make implementation effective.
* The implementation of action plans should be reviewed in a regular way and there should be an independent evaluation of results upon their completion. It is equally as important to assess the process, in terms of participation, inclusiveness and transparency, as it is to evaluate the end result.
* States should ensure high-level and long-term support for the action plans through the active involvement of politicians and the leadership of the authorities and agencies responsible for the plan’s implementation. Action plans stretching over national and local elections should be discussed and/or adopted by parliaments to ensure continuity.
* The human rights planning should be coordinated with the budgetary process to secure proper funding for human rights work. It is necessary to review budget proposals from a human rights perspective to inform politicians of the consequences of their decisions and to hold them accountable.
* A significant part of this policy should be to integrate human rights into the ordinary work of the public administrations and to ensure effective coordination and cooperation between the authorities at all levels by setting up networks or other fora for discussion and exchange of experiences.
* Local authorities should be encouraged to develop comprehensive local baseline studies, action plans or similar documents ensuring regular reviews of the local situation and coordinated efforts to address human rights challenges. Adequate systems should be established for monitoring the provision of health care, education or social services, whether provided by private or public actors, using the rights-based approach.
* It is essential to set up adequate systems for data collection and analysis, including data on disadvantaged groups of people. Collection of sensitive data should be voluntary and accompanied by proper safeguards to prevent the identification of individuals belonging to a particular group. Official data should be complemented with relevant information from national human rights structures and from NGOs.
* The independence of the Ombudsmen and other national human rights structures must be respected. They should have sufficient resources to fulfil their role. Consideration should be given to establishing such institutions at the regional or local level to facilitate easy access for ordinary people. These bodies, if adequately resourced, may also facilitate the establishment of national systems of information on the Convention and the Court’s procedures and make this information easily accessible for every interested individual.
* Fostering a human rights culture through the full integration of human rights in education and training as well as through awareness-raising is another major building block. It is essential that concrete and accessible language be used in all human rights education. The educational needs of public officials and other professionals who deal with the human rights of others should be assessed to ensure that they have a thorough and up-to-date knowledge of the international standards relevant to their field of competence.
A serious package of reforms along these lines would improve the protection of human rights in any country. It would respond to the fundamental principle of subsidiarity which is enshrined in the Convention. The ideal is that each individual is able to seek and receive justice at home.
Other parts of the Council of Europe – including my own office and the Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs - offer advisory services to member states in order to facilitate such systematic measures for the domestic realisation of human rights.
These efforts will only give the desired results if governments give them much higher priority than hitherto. Even so, their implementation will take some time which in turn underlines the need for immediate reforms of the Court proceedings in Strasbourg.
Indeed, this Court will never be redundant, even if a large number of cases now coming there would instead be satisfactorily resolved at national level. The wisdom of the Court will continue to be decisive in key cases when we need an authoritative interpretation of the Convention
Thomas Hammarberg
1. CM Recommendations (2004) 4, 5, 6 of 12 May 2004 as key components of the “reform package”. (back)
2. See also Commissioner’s Recommendation on systematic work for implementing human rights at the national level, CommDH (2009)3, 18/02/2009. (back)
UPDATE:
I decided to leave them the following comment...
"The Strasbourg Court is a source of hope for many – its continued effective functioning must be guaranteed"
What hope do the convicted prisoners in the UK have of voting at the next UK general election? It is 5 years since the Court decided Hirst v UK(No2). Where is the effective functioning when the Court and the Committee of Ministers and Council of Europe keeps letting the UK get away with not implementing the Court decision? Must be guaranteed? It is no good speaking the words if your actions and the actions of the UK fail to deliver upon that guarantee. Actions speak louder than words. The Association of Prisoners asks 'How do you get a court decision implemented?'.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)