Author: welland2

What happens now?


The country (UK) has decided to leave the EU: so what next?

In the early hours of yesterday morning, the referendum was concluded and the country decided to leave the EU on a high turnout.  The Prime Minister is to resign and there may be an election by Christmas.

One of the key issues that decided the referendum was the question of immigration and the other was sovereignty.  While those politicians who were in favour of remaining in the EU, went on about the economy, security, jobs and so forth, it was obvious from interviews in the street (vox pops) that very many people were concerned about more basic matters.  As far as many of them were concerned, they were suffering from the effects of austerity and the people who were making matters worse were the immigrants.  They were ‘flooding’ into the country and were putting a strain on public services and bidding down wages (it was claimed) thus making their own lives a misery.  Membership of the EU made matters worse as we were unable to stem the tide because of their rules.  Coming out was clearly a solution to their woes.

Sovereignty also reared its head from time to time and a familiar line was taking back our sovereignty so that we can make our own laws and run our own affairs, free from interference by Brussels bureaucrats and unelected judges in Strasbourg.  The election of our own judges is something that must have passed us all by.

So what of the Human Rights Act?  The Conservative’s manifesto made clear their desire to scrap it and replace it with a British Bill of Rights.  Months have gone by since the election and no sign has been seen of this document.

But if anything is clear from yesterday’s events, it is that hatred of the EU and its alleged interference in our affairs – including our legal affairs – is very strong and was one of the deciding factors which enabled the Brexiters to win the referendum.  This has been whipped up by a right-wing press and not a little xenophobia.

The problem now for the new government – expected at the time of writing to be formed by Boris Johnson – is that they just cannot leave the BBoR to one side in view of the fervour generated and promises they have made to the electorate.  But, the EU will be wanting a speedy departure by the UK from the EU, and not on painless terms either, to prevent contagion spreading to other disaffected countries.  So considerable time will need to be spent by thousands of civil servants negotiating new terms, agreements and treaties to enable our new relationship with the EU to continue.  Enormous parliamentary time will be needed as well.  The question is therefore – will there be the time or energy for this battle?  Getting a diminished set of rules through the Lords will not be easy.

It is a great pity that so many politicians have allowed the untruths and exaggerations by the right-wing media to gain such traction and to go unanswered.  Many believe that all red tape and rulings from Brussels are automatically bad news and diminish our lives.  We would be so much better off without them they say.  The word ‘free’ is used a lot: free of such rules, free to trade where we will, free to rule our lives and free of encumbrances generally.   The HRA has been a lifeline for many, many people in the UK.  They have used it to secure redress against arbitrary decisions which affect their lives.  Public authorities have to be cognisant of the act in their policy making.  Is all this to go?

We may ask the question ‘free for whom?’  Axing the HRA will not provide ordinary people with more freedom, but less.

So whether we will see the end of the HRA remains to be seen.

 

1

Saudi blackmails UN


Saudi Arabia has successful blackmailed the UN to remove itself from a blacklist
Source: youthhealthmag.com

Human rights groups around the world have condemned the decision by the U.N. to remove Saudi Arabia from a blacklist of countries which are accused of abusing children’s rights.  This arises from their bombing activities in the Yemen conflict but also the general treatment of children in Saudi.  In Yemen, 1,953 children were killed and it is estimated that 60% of these deaths are as a result of Saudi bombing.  Britain is a major supplier of weapons to the regime and British service personnel are advising the Saudis.

The kingdom, who routinely violates their own citizens’ human rights on a daily basis, threw a fit when the UN published its report and threatened to withhold funding from the organisation.

Foreign Policy reported that:

senior Saudi diplomats told top U.N. officials Riyadh would use its influence to convince other Arab governments and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to sever ties with the United Nations.

On Monday, Ban Ki-moon said

The Saudi coalition would be removed from the list, pending a review. Saudi U.N. Ambassador Abdallah Al-Mouallimi insisted the removal was “irreversible and unconditional.”

Human rights groups, including Amnesty, have rightfully condemned and blasted the UN for their reversal:

It appears that political power and diplomatic clout have been allowed to trump the U.N.’s duty to expose those responsible for the killing and maiming of more than 1,000 of Yemen’s children,

Sajjad Mohammad Sajid, Oxfam’s country director in Yemen, said in a statement:

The decision to retract its finding is a moral failure and goes against everything the U.N. is meant to stand for.

Philippe Bolopion, Human Rights Watch deputy director for global advocacy, said that the office “has hit a new low by capitulating to Saudi Arabia’s brazen pressure” and “Yemen’s children deserve better.”

Amnesty International’s UN office claimed:

…if the U.N. doesn’t start standing up for human rights and its own principles then they will become part of the problem rather than the solution.

Saudi Arabia will not be the first country to browbeat the UN – at one time or another all countries have done it especially where embarrassing national interest is a stake.  This does seem to have been an especially egregious example however as the Saudi state’s crimes against children, and others, is well documented.  Combined with the bizarre election of the Saudi’s onto the Human Rights Council of the UN – supported shamefully by the UK Government – it begins to make a mockery of this international body.

Follow us on Twitter and Facebook

0

Brexit and human rights


Human rights will be diminished if we leave Europe

Human rights have not directly figured much in the vexed debate about whether to remain or leave the European Union.  The arguments seem to have settled on immigration, which has become a toxic topic, with the Brexiters claiming that a leave vote will enable us to regain control of our borders.  The Conservative government has promised to repeal the Human Rights Act but progress has been slow so far.  Reporting on the many issues has been poor with the main focus on the scrapping between the Tory party factions rather than on a measured debate.

The crucial question on how our rights will be affected after a vote to leave – if that should happen on Friday – has received little coverage.  Partly this is because of the complexity of the subject and also detailed discussions of legal judgements does not make for racy copy.  As ever, Rights Info has done an excellent job of discussing the issues with a link through to the Independent newspaper (now only online) which has also done a detailed analysis.

Despite its faults, the European Convention, which in turn led to the Human Rights Act, has been of considerable benefit to ordinary people.  For many this will come as a surprise and for readers of the right wing press in the UK, a statement at variance to the facts as they know them.  And this has been a large part of the problem: a deliberate and sustained attack on the act which has included misreporting, non-reporting and the running of scare stories many of which have no foundation in fact.  For readers of the Daily Mail in particular but also the Sun, the Daily Telegraph and the Daily Express, they are treated to lurid stories of terrorists going free, criminals living the high-life in prison and murderers demanding pornography as their ‘human right’ (they didn’t).

Why the right wing media should be so hostile to the act (as opposed to airing proper criticism of it) is discussed by Francesca Klug in her book A Magna Carta for all Humanity (Routledge, 2015).

As the late, great former Lord Chief Justice Lord Bingham put it: there is ‘inherent in the whole of the ECHR … a search for balance between the rights of the individual and the rights of the wider society.’  For the press to mention this inherent approach would not only spoil a good story, it could draw attention to an inconvenient truth: that Article 10 ECHR, the right to free expression, explicitly states that free speech comes with ‘duties and responsibilities’.  This is not a very popular statement with many journalists.  But, I suppose – with notable exceptions – the press is hardly alone in thinking that responsibilities apply to everyone but themselves.  (p265)

She goes on to explain that there was little legal remedy against press intrusion before the act was passed.  Common law provided no real protection.  An example was Gordon Kaye, the star of the TV series Allo, Allo who was recovering in hospital after a car accident.  Two Sunday Sport journalists entered his hospital room and interviewed and photographed him.  In view of his medical state it is unlikely he knew what was happening.  Under existing English law he had no redress.

Brexiters like to portray English law as some kind of noble construct which has been diminished by Europe and that by leaving, we will be able to get rid of all this interference by ‘unelected European judges’ and get back to the way we were.  Europe is presented in purely negative terms and acting to diminish our rights.  British law is indeed a fine system in many respects, but without the HRA we would never have had the investigation into the activities of the press and phone hacking; no Leveson enquiry and the Murdochs (father and son) being asked to come before a select committee.

The benefits of the act to ordinary people in their struggles for justice against the police or public authorities are seldom mentioned.  The use by the media themselves to defend their sources or to prevent unjust interference by the police or security services is likewise rarely mentioned.  The rights ordinary people enjoy have almost in every case been achieved after a struggle and the current government is keen to erode these rights still further.  Access to the courts and the availability of legal aid has been seriously curtailed; further legislation to diminish the – already limited – rights of trades unions is planned, and the Snooper’s Charter is well on its way to becoming law.

The idea therefore that we will be better protected if we leave is not supported by the evidence.  If we leave Europe and the process begins to abolish the Human Rights Act (which our MP, Mr John Glen is keen to do) and other treaties, it will only result in diminished rights for the ordinary people of this country.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter

 

 

 

0

F1 in Azerbaijan


F1 to take place in Azerbaijan this weekend where human rights are seriously restricted
Baku F1 circuit.  Picture: racerviews.com

It’s called ‘sportswash’ and it is the present day attempt by tyrannical regimes to get themselves some positive publicity by hosting a sporting event, in this case, motor racing.  And they do not seem to have any difficulty in persuading sponsors, drivers and others involved to come to their country and lend support to the host however poorly they behave.

Bernie Ecclestone, when questioned about the dismal human rights record in Azerbaijan said:

The moment someone tells me that human rights are, then we can have a look at it, and see when and where it applies.  (Source – Daily Mail)

One could mention the UN Declaration or the European Convention on Human Rights as a starting point but one gets the impression there wouldn’t be much interest.

But Kerry Moscogiuri, director of campaigns at Amnesty International UK, said:

The arrival of Formula One in Baku must not steer attention away from the Azerbaijani authorities’ human rights crackdown.

Behind the glitz the authorities are locking up their critics, have shut down NGOs and arrested or harassed their leaders.  The recent release of some of those jailed on trumped-up charges should not fool anyone into thinking that the wind in Baku is blowing in a different direction.

Azerbaijan has courted big international sports events to improve its image abroad and the Grand Prix is no different.  While the world’s fastest drivers take to the streets of Baku in this spectacle of speed, there are many who will not be able to enjoy the show.

F1 is in pole position to influence positive change in Azerbaijan.  We would like to see them publicly urge President Aliyev to end this crackdown and free all prisoners of conscience.

Rebecca Vincent of Sport for Rights commented:

Bernie Ecclestone’s attitude to human rights is an embarrassment for Formula One.  The Sport For Rights coalition has repeatedly raised the cases of political prisoners in Azerbaijan with those in the F1 world, without anything resembling a sufficient response. The sport and its sponsors should be ashamed to allow themselves to be used as a propaganda tool for repressive governments such as President Aliyev’s.

They also claim that media outlets critical of Aliyev’s government have been harassed and intimidated and subsequently forced to close, while four journalists have also died in custody since 2005, according to Sport for Rights.

It all seems a long way from the Greek idea which informed their philosophy behind the idea of athletics and sporting prowess.  This philosophy was that the success of a democratic government depended on the moral character of the citizenry and sport was part of that philosophy.  This was a large part of the motivation for the combined athletic/moral training.  Now that sport is a business it only seems to matter who can pay the most.  Sport is now part of the apparatus of repression rather that something which uplifts the soul.  Thus any regime which oppresses its citizens and ignores human rights can host a football tournament, motor racing event or some other sporting attraction at will.  The people who take part in these events seem unconcerned at the misery which surrounds them and they are guaranteed uncritical coverage of their exploits in the media.

 

 

 

1

Children from Syria


Tonight!

The problems of Syria and people fleeing that country are seldom out of the news these days and indeed, the issue of immigration – and immigrants from Syria are part of the problem – is high up on the agenda with the debate about Brexit or Remain in the European Union.  Many people are responding in interviews that the reason they want us to leave is to stop the flow of refugees and immigrants coming to the UK.

All the talk about ‘immigrants’ can sometimes cloud the fact that these are people we are talking about and people means children as well.  Children who may have witnessed terrible events and even have lost parents in the conflict.

So a talk being organised by the Romsey group of AI is timely.  They have invited someone from Firefly International to give a talk on Monday 20 June starting at 19:45.  It will be about the conditions in Southern Turkey and their projects for children in that area.  It will be in Abbey Hall, Romsey, SO15 8EL.

All welcome.

0

Walk


The Southampton group of Amnesty is organising a walk starting in Whiteparish on Saturday 25 June starting at 10am.  Then meeting for lunch at the Parish Lantern [SP5 2LA] followed by a further walk starting at 13.30.  Total distance around 9 miles but you are free to do the morning or afternoon half if you wish.  Some parts are muddy so come with suitable footwear. Food menu is at menu

If you would like to take part then contact Stephen on stephenedwards12@gmail.com to reserve a place.  Please order your food ahead.

 

0

Group minutes available


The minutes of the June meeting are now available thanks to group member Lesley for typing them up.  We discussed the stall on Saturday; the film at the Arts Centre; the video based on North Korea and the death penalty among other things.  The full minutes can be read below:

June minutes (pdf)

0

Funds from stall to go to Africa


 

At its meeting on Thursday evening, the group decided that the profits from the stall which will take place in the market square in Salisbury tomorrow – Saturday – will go to this month’s Amnesty Urgent Action.  In the event we took £234 so over £460 will go the the African state.  Thanks to all those who helped on the stall and who bought things from us.

IMG_4031
Picture of the stall in Blue Boar Row, Salisbury

 

This action concerns the treatment of women in Burkina Faso and in neighbouring Sierra Leone.  They are subject to forced marriages often to men who are up to 50 years older than them.  Some can be married as young as 10.  They have no choice over these marriages nor when nor whether to get pregnant.  Some have babies at such a young age that their lives can be threatened or they experience lasting medical complications including incontinence.  Female Genital Mutilation is also common.

The Department for International Development DfID has agreed to match any funds raised by Amnesty for a programme of education in those countries.

So all funds will go to this cause (less the fee we have to pay Salisbury City Council for the pitch)

You can read further details if you wish

UPDATE: 23 June

Report sent to the Salisbury Journal and was published 23 June can be read here:

The funds raised by the Salisbury group of Amnesty International at their stall last Saturday are to be sent to Burkina Faso in Africa as part of a programme to help girls and women in those countries.
The group managed to raise over £234 and this will be doubled by the Department for International Development to make £468.  In Burkina Faso, whether you are a girl or a woman, you are prevented from making crucial decisions about marriage and whether or when to get pregnant.  Some girls as young as 10 are married and their partners can be as much as fifty years their senior.  Physical and sexual violence against women and girls is common and a particular concern is the large number of pregnancy complications and death among girls who bodies are not yet ready to bear children.
Amnesty in Burkina Faso is working with 5 of the shelters which house girls who have been subject to early forced marriage or female genital mutilation.
Andrew Hemming, the chair of the local group said “we are delighted to have contributed to this scheme and for the funds to go to such a good purpose.  The doubling of the monies raised by DfID makes it extremely worthwhile.”  Further details can be found on the group website
1

Wiltshire lawyer now in Florida


Swindon Lawyer goes to Florida to work on death row cases

A former Swindon Amnesty member and lawyer, Catherine Dunmore, has secured funds from a crowdsourcing site to enable her to go to the state of Florida in the USA to work on first degree murder cases.  She has been there three weeks now and she has a blog which is worth reading.  Florida is one of the states still using the death penalty.

texas executionWe hope you will follow her blog and also be moved to send funds to her crowdfunding site.

0

Death penalty letter


This is the text of a letter sent to the Salisbury Journal but which was not published:

The Salisbury Group of Amnesty International is campaigning to end the use of the death penalty around the world. Of particular concern to the local group is its use in countries like Iran to execute juveniles.
As the report recently published by Amnesty shows, around the world at least 1,634 people were executed last year, a 54% increase on the previous year.  This excludes China where the numbers are a state secret.
Frequently,  after a high-profile murder or terrorist action in this country, someone will call for the death penalty to be re-introduced.  When emotions run high it’s almost understandable, but it would be a mistake.  The Amnesty report shows how in nearly every country where they still apply capital punishment, trials are grossly unfair, defendants are mistreated in prison, and legal representation is shockingly poor.  In the USA, defence lawyers have fallen asleep during trials.  In Iran, hearings may last only ten minutes.  In China, where torture is rife, thousands are executed.  This is not a club we want to join.
Further details can be seen on the Group’s web site http://www.salisburyai.com/  and we would welcome anyone who would like to join us in our campaign to end the practice of the execution of juveniles in Iran.
 Follow us on Twitter and Facebook
0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑