Category: Human rights,

Group minutes: September


September 2024

We are pleased to attach the minutes of our group meeting in September 2024 – thanks to group member Lesley for preparing them. The minutes contain a lot of interest including future group actions (see the last page). We are celebrating our formation 50 years ago and we shall be holding a brief photo op in Salisbury market square on 3 October near the Guildhall. All supporters and those with an interest in human rights are welcome to come.

We are 50 this year!

Note that we are no longer on X due to its recent history but we do have a presence on Mastodon with the handle @SalisburyAmnesty

Amnesty Minutes – September 2024Download

0

Trudi Warner case dropped


The new government has decided not to appeal against the judge’s decision to throw out the contempt of court case

August 2024

Readers may recall an earlier post discussing the Trudi Warner decision. This concerned a judge not allowing defendants to say they were climate campaigners in their defence. Warner stood outside the court with a placard saying that juries had a right to decide a case based on their conscience and not necessarily as the judge directs. The government’s legal department has indicated to the Appeal Court it is dropping the matter.

0

Shamima Begum


Court of Appeal turns down Shamima Begum appeal to challenge citizenship ruling.

August 2024

Shamima Begum’s appeal to overturn the government’s decision to remove her British citizenship was turned down by the Court of Appeal on 7 August. They said her appeal ‘[did] not raise an arguable point of law’. She fled the country in 2015 with two others – now believed to be dead – in order to join ISIS then in the process of trying to establish an Islamic caliphate. ISIS committed a number of horrific crimes, including beheadings, and large numbers of people died during their violent reign.

Begum was 15 when she fled and once there, she became a bride, had three children all of whom died young. She is now 24 and is living in al-Roij camp in Syria. A great deal of rage settled on her and various commentators have tried to understand this – why her? Partly it seems to be a mixture of misogyny and the fact she did not conform to the standard narrative of someone who had done what she did and now sought forgiveness. She became a kind of figurehead for the rage people felt about the terrible actions of ISIS. It also seems to have been forgotten that she was a child of 15 when she left.

Removing someone’s citizenship is a severe retribution however and seems to have been done by the then home secretary Said Javid in response to tabloid rage. The argument that she was a ‘threat to national security’ is absurd and in what way was never explained. It has never been claimed that she committed any atrocity. How she would be a threat if she returned to the UK is also not explained. The government tried to argue that she could become a Bangladeshi citizen, an argument Lord Sumption described as a ‘legal fiction’.

Amnesty has issued a press release on this topic.

“It’s deeply concerning that the Supreme Court has concluded there’s no point of law to be considered on such a serious matter as stripping a British person of her citizenship – particularly when that was done on the back of her being exploited as a 15-year-old child.

“Stripping Shamima Begum’s nationality was profoundly wrong – she is and has always been British.

“Begum is now exiled in dangerous and inhuman conditions, along with thousands of other people, including women and children, in north-east Syria”.

“The UK should follow others by taking responsibility for nationals stranded in Syria – including by assisting in their safe return to the UK, whether or not that means facing possible criminal investigation or prosecution on their return.”

It is interesting to note that in an article in the Daily Mail on line, they report that the residents of Bethnal Green (where Shamima Begum used to live) would ‘welcome her back’.

There is now likely to be an appeal to the European Court of Human rights.

0

Starmer’s wish to see more facial recognition technology


The prime minister wishes to see more facial recognition technology following riots in Southport and elsewhere

August 2024

Following the terrible murder of three little girls and the wounding of eight others in Southport last week, riots have broken out in various parts of the UK. A mixture of extremists and far right groups have assembled outside mosques and refugee centres to engage in violent acts including attacks on the police. These groups have claimed links to asylum seekers and immigrants to the murders and this has led them to take these violent actions. Several people phoning in the the BBC’s Any Answers programme on Saturday 3 August, made claims linking the murders to boat people even though the young man who has been charged is from Cardiff and is not a boat person.

People have been rightly outraged by the high-jacking of the tragic deaths of the three little girls by large numbers of far right groups many of whom travel to the area with the intention of engaging in violence. There is a natural desire to see these people to be identified, arrested and brought to justice. There is great pressure on the new government to ‘do something’ and the Home Secretary and the Prime Minister have made statements. The latter has called for the greater use of facial recognition technology (FR) in the task of identifying ‘thugs’.

We should be very wary of going down this path. It has echoes of Jeremy Bentham’s idea of a panopticon in the nineteenth century: a prison where prisoners could be watched at all times. It fed into the idea of complete control by governments or their agents as a means of social control.

There are several reasons for being wary of introducing more FR. Although it could be used to locate and arrest those involved in the current mayhem or any future outbreaks, it would introduce into the public realm greater powers for the police and politicians. The last decade has seen a number of laws enacted to prevent or seriously limit protests and demonstrations. Britain has had a history of such protests and they have led to improvements in the role of women in society, better housing, an end to slavery and a range of social improvements and rights for ordinary people. This technology would however, give police considerably enhanced powers to clamp down on protests. We may deplore the sometimes extreme actions of the climate protestors, but without such protests, the government would be unlikely to take action of climate change.

To tackle the violence and riots in other words, we would be giving the government enhanced powers over other forms of legitimate protest. There is also the vexed issue of control. The various scandals we have seen in recent years including the Post Office, the biggest one of all, have shown an inability by the vast range of controls, audits, select committees, etc. etc. to exert any kind of realistic control over these organisations. They achieve lives of their own and seem impervious to moral principles or honest dealings. Do we really want to give them yet more technology?

Another objection is that it would give yet more power to the tech giants over our lives. A feature of the riots is how easy it has been for rioters to assemble by using such media as X and Telegram. These are American firms and are more of less completely outside anyone’s control. It was Elon Musk who decided to allow Tommy Robinson back onto X for example. So we have politicians and journalists making speeches, statements and writing opinion pieces, when it was the decision by one man on the other side of the pond which has provided a key weapon for the far right groups. Although Sir Keir is making noises about the tech giants, will the government actually do anything?

Finally, it sees the solution to these problems in technological terms: we have problem, lets install some more kit and problem solved. The issues are much deeper than simply arresting some thugs. Poverty, low wages, poor housing, inflation and a host of other issues have led to groups of people feeling left behind or ignored by the politicians and to an extent the media.

We should think very carefully before giving politicians yet more power to intrude into our lives. Even though it may mean some of the rioters escaping justice. China has this system installed offering the government almost complete control over its citizens. They have 700 million such cameras used widely as a means to monitor its citizens and to repress minorities. Perhaps we should remember the Chinese proverb ‘a journey of a thousand miles begins with just a single step’. Our liberties are fragile and we should be extremely cautious of giving government’s powers to limit them further. It has the power to be the biggest threat to human rights and civil liberties in the UK.

0

Rights Lawyers in China: 9 Years after 709 Crackdown


China: 9th Anniversary of 709 Crackdown on Rights Lawyers and Defenders: 10 Notable Events Over Past Year
0

The State v. Trudi Warner


Interesting and troubling webinar by the Good Law Project on the case of Trudi Warner

June 2024

Readers will recall that earlier in the year, Trudi Warner stood outside the Inner London Criminal Court and held up a placard telling passers by that juries had the right to vote on their conscience. The trial was taking place of several climate activists and a key issue was that the judge in the case, Judge Silas Reid, prevented the defendants from mentioning that they were campaigning for action on the climate. The worry was that if the jury realised that this was what the defendants were doing, there was a probability that they would acquit. Many websites commenting on this case allege that the judge is against people protesting (which we cannot verify) hence his aggressive threats to defendants and others.

Trudi Warner was then arrested for contempt of court by displaying her placard which states a fact, long established in English law, that juries can indeed vote on their consciences. This was established in the Bushell (sometimes Bushel) case of 1670, where a judge locked up a jury and deprived them of food and water for disobeying his directions.

Jolyon Maugham of the Good Law Project, said that people had a ‘sweet notion’ of the law which this case cast into doubt. It was one of the factors in the Brexit debate where people often spoke of sovereignty and an aspect of that was hostility to Brussels (actually Strasbourg) telling us what to do. ‘We should have our own laws’ was a frequent refrain. This has re-emerged with the proposed Rwanda flights and a desire by some politicians to come out of the European Convention. There is a deep belief in the primacy of British Justice with its ancient traditions going back to Magna Carta. This and other cases demonstrate that this sanguine view of our justice system is misplaced.

Climate protests

The state has the power to lock people up and juries are a means of tempering this power he said. The plain fact was that the fossil fuel companies mounted well-funded campaigns to promote their activities and frustrate governments trying curb fossil fuel use. There is a close association between government, Big Oil and the media. Sections of the media refer to protestors as an ‘eco-mob’, ‘zealots’ or a ‘rabble’ among other epithets. Fossil fuel companies fund several Tufton Street think tanks with millions, yet TV companies, including the BBC and Channel 4, fail to ask interviewees from them, ‘who funds you?’

The various protest organisations including XR and Just Stop Oil angered government ministers by highlighting the shortcomings of government actions in dealing with the climate crisis. Their activities had also angered members of the public who were sometimes inconvenienced. As ever, a totally peaceful protest is ignored but glue yourself to the pavement and you achieve some publicity.

Arrest

So Trudi Warner was arrested for contempt of court and ended up in the Old Bailey for trial 8 days later. At a permission hearing which establishes whether there is an arguable case, it was thrown out by the judge who said that the ‘government had mischaracterised the evidence‘ and that it was ‘fanciful to suggest that Ms Warner’s actions fall into the category of contempt‘. The government said it is to appeal the decision [before the election was called]. It is ironic to note that a plaque celebrating the seventeenth century Bushell case is fixed to a wall in … the Old Bailey. To remind ourselves – the placard merely pointed out the plain fact that a jury has the right to decide a matter according to its conscience and to disagree with the judge’s direction.

Conclusion

The government has introduced a range of bills which all have an effect of making protest more difficult and risky. Police have been given more powers which they have used in preventing protests from taking place including, for example, at the Coronation. There is a kind of cosy alliance between Big Oil with its range of well-funded lobbyists; a government all too keen to restrict protest, and some media organisations who eagerly demonise protestors and deny climate science. In the process, rights and justice are trampled on. If, as is being predicted, a Labour government comes into power on 5th July, it will be interesting to see if they pursue the appeal. It will a quick test on whether they will follow in the authoritarian footsteps of their predecessors or adopt a more permissive regime. Early signs are not promising as they do not have plans to annul any of the existing legislation.

During the webinar, we saw clips of film of the protests prepared by Page 75 Productions who will be hosting a showing of the full film in September. A video can be accessed here.

Sources: Good Law Project; The Guardian; The Canary; Christian Climate Actions

1

Human Rights lecture


Human rights lecture in Southampton with Kate Adie

April 2024

We are delighted to tell you that Southampton group’s 10th Annual Human Rights lecture will be on Tuesday 14 May.  The venue is the Faculty of Arts and Humanities at the Avenue Campus of the University of Southampton, SO17 1BJ.  The journalist Kate Adie, CBE DL, Chief News Correspondent for BBC News between 1989 and 2003, will be the speaker.  The lecture is free to attend though you will be asked to book via Eventbrite.  It will begin at 6.00 p.m. and refreshments will be available beforehand.  They are still awaiting final details, including the link for booking. 

0

Jury trial protest


Protest at Salisbury Law Courts concerning freedom of juries to exercise their conscience

April 2024

A group of people from Defend our Juries staged a protest outside Salisbury law courts this week as part of their campaign to in support of a social worker Trudi Warner who was arrested for contempt of court while protesting outside the Inner London Crown Court. The issue concerns the right of a jury to exercise their conscience when taking their decision and relates to the question of defendants not being allowed to mention that they were engaged in a climate protest at the time of their arrest.

The last two posts concerning Hillsborough and the settlement by Hugh Grant of his legal case against the publishers of the Sun newspaper, NGN have mentioned the poor performance of the legal system in each. At Hillsborough, the relatives of those crushed at the disaster had to endure years of frustration and abuse not helped by the legal system and in the case of Hugh Grant, he has had to settle because the way the costs system works could lead him seriously out of pocket in the face of a publisher determined not to allow the hundreds of victims to have their day in court.

Another aspect which has surfaced recently is the passing of laws making protest harder and harder to undertake. The main motivation has been the environmental protestors who have carried out a number of eye-catching demonstrations which have highlighted the failure – in their view – of the government to take environmental matters seriously enough.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 has a series of measures which make protests much more difficult and risky. The Police now have enhanced powers to limit marches and to issue fines if those involved create too much noise nuisance for example. There is no specific right to protest but there is a right to assemble and to free speech.

The Bill is part of a hugely worrying and widespread attack on human rights from across Government which will not only see basic rights reduced across the board, but will also strip people of the means to challenge or contest their treatment.

In its reports on the bill, Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights said the proposals are “oppressive and wrong”. It accuses the government of trying to create “new powers in areas where the police already have access to powers and offences which are perfectly adequate”.

The issue of juries and conscience is a complex one, and it is not the case that juries can exercise their conscience if that means ignoring the evidence given in the trial. But what might be happening here is a feeling that the government, the police and CPS are out of touch with public opinion concerning protests, and the climate. Juries are a key part of our history and are a means for 12 good men (and women) and true to exercise some common sense, a fact that sometimes seems to be lacking in our legal system. There will be many who feel that it is relevant to say that a defendant was on some kind of protest. They may also be feeling that the government has become too determined to inhibit protests. As we have noted before, many of the rights we take for granted today were achieved following sometimes years of protest. The suffragists campaigned peacefully for decades for the right for women to have the vote and were ignored. The suffragettes protested more aggressively and eventually achieved success. Female ministers keen on the new laws might wish to reflect they would not have the opportunity to do so had it not been for their sisters willing to protest and who suffered grievously when imprisoned.

Sources: BBC, Salisbury Journal, Amnesty

0

Palantir and the NHS


Human rights concerns with the use of Palantir software in the NHS

February 2024

The current issue of the Amnesty magazine (Spring 2024) poses some human rights questions concerning the use by the NHS of the American firm Palantir to create a data platform. With recent revelations surrounding Fujitsu’s Horizon program used by the Post Office and which destroyed the lives and livings of nearly a thousand sub postmasters, we should take a careful look at the firms being used to do this IT and data work. 

And looking at Palantir is not a pretty sight. Founded by the CIA, its primary interest is treating people as suspects or targets. Its software is used by both NSA and GCHQ and is designed as a surveillance tool. It is used by some police forces in the US in what is called ‘predictive policing’ which has a dubious history. It was used for workplace deportation raids also in the US as part of Donald Trump’s actions against immigrants. Another troubling use is by the Israeli military to ‘help the country’s war effort’. 

A key investor is Peter Thiel, founder of PayPal who is, paradoxically, hostile to the notion of an NHS and to government aid programmes generally. He is a funder and supporter of Donald Trump.

The Amnesty article says ‘Any company linked to serious human rights abuses should be excluded from tendering for NHS contracts on grounds of ‘professional misconduct”. Essentially, the British public needs to be reassured that information gathered by Palantir won’t be harvested by them for other purposes. 

American companies have had their eyes on the NHS for many years and have spent considerable sums trying to get contracts. It was likely to be a key issue in the UK/US trade deal negotiations post Brexit, now a lost cause. Palantir offered to assist the Covid-19 response for a fee of £1 (not one million) because it gave them an ‘in’ and the ability to build a datastore. 

As we have learned from Horizon and the Post Office, as well as other IT disasters, there are many concerns about IT firms, their actual ability to do what they claim they will do, their integrity and the security of the data they collect. Major firms like X, Facebook, WhatsApp and others have shown a cavalier attitude to online safety for the young and other vulnerable individuals. We also have British politicians and ministers openly hostile to human rights issues and some would like to see the Human Rights Act abolished. This is a toxic mix. We will have the usual platitudes and reassurances about ‘online safety is our number one concern’ and other bromides, the reality being that it is way down their lists of priorities. 

The people organising these contracts, the civil servants and the various ministers, have next to no experience of placing contracts or having anything like the expertise needed to keep an eye on this as was explained in Ian Dunt’s book How Westminster Works: and Why it Doesn’t. Twenty ministers came and went during the Post Office, Horizon scandal and did – or were able to do – nothing. 

To use a firm with the history that Palantir has, with the history of blunders surrounding IT contracts and with ministerial oversight feeble or missing altogether is to court disaster and is a huge risk for the confidentiality and security of our private medical information. 

The Salisbury and South Wiltshire group is 50 this year

2

Salisbury Group at 50!


Group is 50 this year!

February 2024

The Salisbury group was established in 1974 and has been going strong for 50 years. It took us a bit by surprise today when we realised this so we haven’t thought of any celebrations yet. But as the last active group in Wiltshire we can allow ourselves a bit of pride that we are still here and still trying to promote the human rights cause in the county.

It probably seems a little different today from 50 years ago. Human rights then were regarded as a good thing and support was largely unquestioning. The war was a living memory for many and a desire never to see a repeat of the death and destruction of the war and the horrors of the Holocaust was deeply felt. 

A long time has passed however and today, we see successive Conservative governments seeking to end or curtail the Human Rights Act. Laws have been passed making protest more difficult and the police have been given more powers to arrest those protesting. Much of the media keeps up a steady campaign denigrating human rights and suggesting they are a means for terrorists and serious criminals to escape justice because their ‘rights’ have been infringed. We are made less safe they claim because of the act rather than the precise opposite. The benefits the act has brought is seldom mentioned. The success of the Hillsborough families in overturning the various coroner and court decisions and the false narrative put out by the police was a major example. 

Some sections of the media do not like the act since it provides some protection from press intrusion and this has led them to carry on a relentless campaign often supported by exaggerated stories.

In the past few years the issue of immigration has come to the fore and immigrants crossing the Channel by boat has become a political hot potato. The government is seeking to send some immigrants to Rwanda in an attempt to discourage smugglers from sending them over from France. There has always been hostility to immigrants as each wave has come over, the Jews from Russia for example at the beginning of the last century. But the notion that we would become more sympathetic and welcoming has not worked out. The question therefore is how embedded are human rights norms and beliefs in our society? The occasional desire for a return of the death penalty, hostility to refugees as just mentioned and evidence of the UK government’s involvement in torture, clampdowns on protest suggest that human rights and human dignity is only shakily rooted in our society.

So although the group is 50 this year, our work is not done!

If you live in the South Wilshire area, we would welcome you joining us. Follow this site for details of what we are doing.

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑