howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
another lunatic let loose and costing us a fortune.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20295754Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Justice Mitting should be removed from the bench. This is an insult to British Justice and the British people.
Roger
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Two obvious ways out of this one: 1. Get the ICJ in The Hague interested and try him on charges of conspiracy to commit crimes against humanity, 2. Try him in UK under Jordanian law, any sentence to be served in UK with Jordan paying the bill. Simples.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
or 3,put up against a wall and acidently shoot him.[before you ask,it went off while cleaning and the sod was in the wrong place at the right time.]
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Just send him to Jordan. This man illegally entered the UK and conspires against us, wanting to deprive us of our 'Human Rights' and impose his will by force and terror. A ruling such as this is an insult to us and makes us look like soft touches. We owe him nothing at all and the Jordanians can do whatever they want to him.
Also - send that idiot judge there with him!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
nothing changes we give asylum to proven terrorists from many countries, i remember egypt saying that the foreign office says not to travel there because of terrorism, yet we harbour those same terrorists.
everyone should face the justice of the country where they committed the crime.
Guest 670- Registered: 23 Apr 2008
- Posts: 573
Barry, the idiot judge as you call him, merely enforces and interprets the laws that the idiot politicians churn out like sausages.
If the Solicitors for Abu Quatada successfully found a loophole in the law that they wriggled their client through in order to gain more time then they are no different to a financial wizard that aides the likes of Starbucks and Amazon to avoid tax.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Dave1, I understand that this Judge was agreeing with/supporting the European Court of Human Rights, not our own judicial system and that is the big problem; we make laws it is true, but European beaurocrats over-ride them.
Roger
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Dave1 - The Human Rights Act is the big problem and the ECHR as Roger says on which it is based. We know who is to blame for the HRA and those who are blocking it replacement.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
What a mess this ones great nation is in once we ruled the seas now we are the kicking stool for all.And this will carry on till we get a very strong leader,who will overrule the judges that do this kind of thing,we need strong leadership,and that is what we do not have ,and not had over many years.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Vic - be careful what you wish for. 'a strong leader who will overrule the judges' sounds a bit like a Hitler or Stalin to me.
Government is about checks and balances and a PM or 'strong leader' cannot be constitutionally allowed to interfere with the courts. Their independence is important even if we disagree with idiots like this judge..
Parliament can and must, however legislate to get rid of the HRA and the ECHR.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Rubbish. That is what we need a strong leader and party behind him but that will not come from Any party we have at this time.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
I see - so Vic Matcham thinks that governments should be above the law.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
The government do or should do make the law,thats why they are voted in.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
Every time something like this comes up it's another boost for an EU out vote
The EU court of rights is are biggest friend I love there rulings
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
The EU and ECHR are different organisations.
Vic - no, the government does not make the laws, Parliament does. There are checks and balances essential to a democracy that prevent a dictatorship. Parliament and the Courts are part of those checks and balances. Go back to your post 10 and my post 11. What you are demanding is a dictatorial set-up such as Hitler, Mussolini or Stalin had without the checks and balances and a situation where the government is above the law. Much as I may agree with the sentiment about strong leadership it must be kept in check within the law and constitutional arrangements. The Courts cannot and must not just be overruled by a 'strong leader' - Parliament must act in a constitutional manner to put right the law. I do not want a dictatorship in this country.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i posted an article on here a while back where countries have ignored rulings by the echr, no excuses the man should not get away with his crimes.
Guest 670- Registered: 23 Apr 2008
- Posts: 573
Vic in the second World War Germany had a very efficient court headed by a judge named Roland Friesler, it was in fact a court that you went in and very seldom came out.
The point is, this court was an organ of the state and as such was far from independent.
It is essential to our democracy that politicians refrain from interfering with the judiciary, it is vital that it remains wholly independent of government, to act otherwise threatens the very freedoms and justice that we have fought for.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
I caught a little of a discussion on this on last night's Newsnight between the Tory 'Sven-lookalike' and the face of Liberty, Shami Chakrabarti.
On the point Howard makes it was mentioned that Italy was fined all of about 2,000 Euros for a similar breach.
The counter point that was made had to do with what message we might send to the ner-do-wells of our society by picking and choosing which courts and which laws we should abide by at a Government level.
"We know who is to blame for the HRA and those who are blocking it replacement."
Yes Barry, we do know, and it was us, at least the us that used to be, the us sickened by war and ready to put in place the beginnings of a more just future. Little did they know, these law makers, that after the sacrifice of combating Fascism in Europe and around the Globe that we would meet that same enemy again within our borders.
The burglar may take umbrage at being shot at while about his chosen work, and Governments also may be piqued, but all must take it upon the chin.
We have already heard a call for mob-justice to prevail in the locale over some perceived slight: Who knows who might be next?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
The ECHR has gone way past what was sensible and just in the post war years to being a danger to life and liberty Tom.
Howard - there is truth in what you say but this is the UK Court using the HRA, based on bringing the European convention into UK law. Defying the UK courts is a different matter to telling the nutty European judges to place their ruling where the sun does not shine.