Category: Human rights,

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

Attacks on UK human rights


Human Rights Watch warn of risk of authoritarianism in the UK

November 2023

The latest Daily Brief from HRW warns of a deteriorating situation with regard to human rights in the UK which they say is ‘worsening’. The right to protest peacefully is under threat as we saw recently with the Palestinian march which the then Home Secretary was keen to ban. She attempted to force the police to ban the march which they declined to do.

They say that we are beginning to move towards a place where the government feels it can undermine the integrity of the judiciary, undermine or scrap human rights laws that don’t serve the current political agenda and to create new laws that do. It is ‘beginning to look very much like authoritarianism’.

A lot of this activity has been driven by two forces: the arrival of the ‘boat people’ across the Channel and the activities of climate protestors. The Palestine marches have recently reinforced this. In all cases, there has been a major outcry from the right wing media joined recently by Talk TV and GB News and this may have led the government to respond the way they have. There is an inherent dislike of protest and the publicity it is able to generate. Despite the march being largely peaceful, it did not stop them being described as ‘hate marchers’ by some. Members of the governing party, including the deputy chair, and soon Boris Johnson, have their own programmes on these channels to promote their views.

Danny Kruger, MP for Devizes in Wiltshire, is joint leader of the ‘New’ Conservatives pressing for the abolition of the HRA and for our departure from the European Convention.

0

Jagtar Singh Johal


Jagtar Singh Johal remains in custody in India on trumped up charges

November 2023

Jagtar was abducted off the street in 2017 and held incommunicado for a number of days during which time he was subjected to brutal treatment and was almost certainly tortured into signing a confession. His ‘crime’ as far as the India government was concerned was to represent the Sikh community and because of his human rights activity and his faith according to the UN.

He has now been in custody for 6 years and concerned lawyers have written to the UK Foreign Office minister Lord Ahmad, asking him to retract his comments saying that Jagtar will receive ‘due process’ in India. Manifestly he has not.

Many MPs were disappointed that the prime minister Rishi Sunak did not do more at the recent G20 summit when he met the India prime minister on the fringes of the meeting. Shockingly, it was revealed that the British security services MI5 and MI6 gave their Indian counterparts a tip-off which led to his arrest and torture. MPs and human rights organisations have criticised the UK government repeatedly over this affair and arrest of a British citizen. They have said the the government has been reluctant to press the Indian government over his arrest and mistreatment and have repeatedly failed to call for his release. The latest claim that he will be subject to due process flies in the face of all the evidence.

There is the suggestion that the ‘government’s timidity and reluctance to press his case too strongly relates to the desire to secure various arms deals with India. A Foreign Office spokesman is quoted as saying that it was committed to resolving his case ‘as soon as possible’.

Sources: Reprieve; Guardian; Independent; Amnesty International

1

Human rights: progress report


Report on the current situation with human rights legislation in the UK

October 2023

It has been distressing to see the steady erosion of rights in the UK with limits on protests, campaigning and access to judicial review all incorporated in legislation. Police powers have also been increased. The war in the Middle East has seen the Home Secretary urge the police to take action against supporters of the Palestinian position.

A disappointing lack of resistance has been seen with the introduction of these new laws and other bills in parliament. There has been opposition in the House of Lords but this has been bypassed or simply ignored. The main resistance has come from outside organisations such as Each Other and Open Britain. The Labour Party has been disappointingly quiet.

At the recent Labour Party conference in Manchester there was a fringe event Human Rights for a better Britain. An Amnesty member, Elena Auer, attended this event and reported:

“I attended a Labour Party fringe event held jointly by Amnesty and The Labour Campaign for Human Rights. It was an interesting networking event with opening remarks robustly setting out our defense of human rights. The Labour party representative set out their belief that human rights should remain at the heart of Labour’s policy and practice. We were given a copy of Amnesty’s new ‘Human Rights Manifesto which was launched this week (W/c 9th October) [we have been unable to locate this online but an older version can be accessed here]. The good news was there was a ground-breaking speech from Emily Thornberry committing the a future Labour government to review all anti-rights legislation. I am hopeful that both Amnesty and Liberty would hold the Labour party to account on this if they do form the next government”.

Whether the party – should it form a government – will do more than ‘review’ the legislation remains to be seen. Review by itself commits the party to nothing and it will have to find parliamentary time to debate and drive through alternative legislation. In view of other pledges and changes it wants to make (if the conference speeches are to be believed) then this time may be limited. These more restrictive laws are likely to be a feature for some considerable time.

As previously reported, The Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, visited Washington DC recently and gave a speech in which she referred to the Human Rights Act as the Criminal’s Rights Act. Liberty has gained permission from the High Court to take criminal action against the government for introducing new anti-protest legislation which has been democratically rejected by parliament just a few months previously.

They say that the Home Secretary has acted unlawfully by using a statutory instrument to give the police more powers to impose restrictions on protests that cause ‘more than minor’ disruption. Statutory Instruments are a way to bring new laws in without having to create a whole new bill. Liberty argues the Home Secretary was not given the power by parliament to take this action, making her action a serious overreach which inviolate he constitutional principle of the separation of powers because the measures have already been rejected b parliament. By bringing in these new powers, the government has been accused of breaking the law by giving the police ‘almost unlimited’ powers to shut down protests due to the vagueness of the new language.

Status of Acts

Briefly, the current status of acts which negatively impact on human rights are:

Nationality and Borders Act 2022Royal assent: May 2022
Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022Royal Assent May 2022
Police, Crime, Sentencing Courts Act 2022Royal Assent July 2022
Public Order Act 2023Royal Assent May 2023
Anti-Strike (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023Royal Assent July 2023

We are grateful for group member Mike for the work in facilitating this post.

0

Arrests prior to the coronation


Graham Smith, the leader of Republic, was arrested prior to the coronation and held for 16 hours

May 2023

UPDATE: 8 May: Police express ‘regret’ at the arrest of Graham Smith. No charges will be brought under the new Public Order Act against any of those arrested. The only charges brought are for drugs related offences. Questions remain concerning why the arrests were made in the first place and what, if any, pressure had been put on the police to make them.

We have been warning for some time in previous posts – along with other organisations – that the desire by the present government and Home Secretary Suella Braverman, to limit the ability of individuals and organisations to protest by passing a series of laws to limit such activity and to give the police yet more powers to carry them out. The new Public Order Act was rushed into law and signed by King Charles just days before his coronation took place.

Using the act (it seems), Graham Smith the leader of Republic, an organisation which believes we should be run as a democracy and not have an inherited royal family at the head of the country, was arrested before the coronation took place. It is unclear on what the grounds the arrest was made and he was released after 16 hours. He was not the only one to be arrested and others included volunteers from Night Stars which prompted Westminster Council to say it was ‘deeply concerned’ by their arrest.

The new legislation arose because of the activities of the climate protestors who used a variety of methods to disrupt the capital including gluing themselves to pavements. Their protests did seem to shine a light on the poor performance by the government to tackle the climate emergency. They were not popular however and the disruption caused to commuters and others led the government to pass a range of laws to limit the ability to protest. The Home Secretary famously said in parliament that such people were “Guardian-reading, tofu eating, dare I say the anti-growth coalition”.

There is a tension when it comes to protesting. There are many who are in support of peaceful protests but are angry about those which are disruptive in some way or even where there is some violence. The problem with peaceful protests is that they are almost always ignored. It is the more violent type which become news and where the cause is thereby recognised. There were many decades of peaceful protests for women to have the vote for example which yielded nothing. Once more violent methods were employed by the suffragettes, change eventually occurred although there were other factors at play.

The Salisbury Amnesty group neither supports nor condemns the campaign for the country to be a Republic. The issue at stake is the right to campaign on the matter. There is no specific right of protest. We do have the right to free speech and we do have a right of assembly under articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention. Giving the police yet more powers to arrest on the pretext that the person might be disruptive is a worrying development. Another worrying development is the alleged use of facial recognition during the coronation. This technology has been widely used by repressive regimes such as China where the ability of people to move almost anywhere is tracked by the police.

Sources: Evening Standard, CNN, The Times, Amnesty International, and yes, the Guardian

0

Conservatives and the ECHR


Suella Braverman, the Home Secretary, wants to take the UK out of the ECHR

December 2022

This post is based on an interesting article in yesterday’s Guardian newspaper, written by Martin Kettle, concerning the Home Secretary, Suella Braverman’s desire to take the UK out of the European Court of Human Rights. Some of the piece concerned his thoughts of the future of Rishi Sunak which is a political discussion upon which we do not comment. Our concerns focus on human rights implications of Braverman’s wishes to take the UK out of the purview of the ECHR.

Kettle notes that the proposed withdrawal is not Conservative Party policy, nor was is it in the latest manifesto in 2019. This indicates that Ms Braverman is operating on her own. The Home Secretary is one of a number of Conservatives (but by no means all) who see the ECHR as a kind of constraint to their ability to manage the nation’s affairs most particularly in connection with refugees and immigration.

This erupted a few months ago with the last minute abandonment of the flight to Rwanda (which was to take place a stones throw from where this post is written), in which the European Court played a key part. Immigrants crossing the Channel in small boats has been a regular news feature over many months and has caused considerable anger among many. As was noted in our last post, by denying safe and legal means to apply to come here, those desperate to escape war or persecution are more or less forced to use these means. When Suella Braverman was questioned about this last week in front of a select committee, neither she nor her PPS, were able to able to provide a convincing answer.

Kettle goes on to say that the arguments around human rights law “encapsulates and stimulates the Tory party’s haphazard retreat into a bubble of English exceptionalism. Whether it is expressed by Braverman or Dominic Raab, the common threads of this are a bogus sense of victimhood (exemplified by the delusion that Britain is uniquely affected by migration) and belief in greatness frustrated (the lies of Brexit) and an impatience with conventional wisdom in favour of reckless contrarianism”.

One of the party’s electoral strengths over many decades was that it claimed to be the party of law and order. Tougher and longer sentencing, crackdowns on this or that crime, support for the police and other actions enabled it to claim that they were the party to vote for if you wanted to sleep safely in your bed at night. Dominic Grieve, the former Attorney General, has noted that today’s ministers seem to display ‘a persistent and almost endemic frustration with legal constraints‘. A combination of rage by some sections of the media about the Channel crossings, combined with their large majority, seems to lead them to believe they can ignore domestic law, international laws and treaties. Laws which stand in the way of ministers pursuing a particular goal are fit only to be ignored or discarded.

In his recent talk to the Judicial Institute (6 December 2022) he refers to the ‘novel constitutional position: that governments are enjoying the confidence of a parliamentary majority have essentially a popular mandate to do whatever they like and that any obstruction of this is unacceptable’ (p10). He points out that this is not the monopoly of the Conservatives – Labour when in power went cold on the HRA and secretly aided American renditions post 9/11. This idea that the law is of value only if it suits the policy position of the government in power is a dangerous one. It goes against the Common Law principle which is key our unwritten constitution. Combined with a belief that a large majority means the public at large are at one with this is also an assumption too far. When there was a Daily Mail assault on the judges putting their photos on the front page under a headline ‘Enemies of the People’ (4 December 2016), because they took a decision their editor did not like, it was noticeable that the then Attorney General, Liz Truss, did not condemn this.

1

Qatar, world cup and human rights


Things have not gone all Qatar’s way in the World Cup

November 2022

Qatar has spent huge sums of money on building stadia and in attempts to promote its image around the world. It was perhaps the most expensive example of sports washing there has been. How successful is it?

Not going to plan

What is obvious is that it has not gone according to plan. Previous nation’s attempts to sanitise their image using sport have, from their point of view, been reasonably successful, one thinks of China. This has been because the sporting community: the sports people themselves, the managers and promoters, the media and many of the supporters – have cared little for the human rights of the countries where competition has taken place. So tennis, golf, boxing, cycling, horse racing, motor sport and other competitions have happily taken place in countries where torture is still practised, opposition is repressed, women have few rights and the death penalty is still a fact of life. Why let a stoning or public amputation spoil a game of tennis? No matter, the money is good and the sports pages of our media do not sully their pages with the sordid goings on outside the field of play. Sport has existed in a kind of bubble making it supremely suitable to be used by autocratic regimes to launder their image.

Qatar has been different. People have noticed and suddenly, some of the sports pages have moved away from sports reporting and are talking about arm bands, protests and footballers not singing the national anthem. The wearing of arm bands has become politically charged. There are pictures of people holding up posters particularly about women’s rights (or should we say, the absence of them). Yesterday, it was the German team covering their mouths. David Beckham who, up till now, has been able to promote himself as the honest Essex boy done good, is now seen in as a somewhat dubious light having accepted a reported £120m fee to be an ambassador for the Qataris. It is said he will not now get his knighthood. When reporters approach him for interview, he is silent. Not yet hero to zero but certainly a damaged brand.

FIFA want us to focus just on the football. Never mind the 6,500 worker deaths, the near absence of women’s rights, the silencing of opposition people and the anti LGBQI+ actions and laws. Where once football was to be the means by which nations came together and mutual understanding increased, now we are enjoined not to look outside the stadium itself. FIFA’s Infantino tells us that he understands prejudice because he has freckles and red hair which was a problem for him at school.

Sports washing may not be the same again

One positive thing may emerge from this World Cup and that is the days of sports washing may not be numbered but it will make countries and despots think twice in future. Instead of hundreds of thousands of supporters and spectators arriving to marvel at the spectacle no questions asked, some of them are asking questions. Some might even be a little uncomfortable at being there at all. The sports pages now mention the uncomfortable truths about the regime where the event is held and do not simply report on the sport as though wearing blinkers. Sport has been a willing captive, happy to take the millions and all too ready to claim ignorance of what happens outside the stadium or arena. The media has also followed the money. Perhaps those days are over and future events will bring a greater readiness to question and take account of the human rights situation in the host country.

0

Good news!


Good news from Amnesty

30 September 2022

“With so much injustice spanning the globe, sometimes it’s hard to remain hopeful that things will change for the better. Trust me, I know – I am often the bearer of bad news, writing to you with urgency of crises, crackdowns, and individuals at risk who have had their human rights violated. But today, we wanted to let you know that the actions of Amnesty supporters around the world really do count. They’ve not only made a meaningful impact for human rights both at home and abroad – but thy’ve also helped change lives.

“Small actions from compassionate people like you, really do have big impacts. Here are just a handful from the past few months:

The first families from Myanmar, Syria and Afghanistan arrived in Australia under a new Community Sponsorship pilot

“After years of relentless advocacy, at the end of 2021 the Australian Federal Government not only announced the rollout of a new Community Sponsorship pilot – they also finally agreed to reduce dramatically the cost of Australia’s existing Community Sponsorship Program, making it more accessible for everyday Australians to participate and welcome refugees into their communities. In August of this year (2022), the first families from Myanmar, Syria and Afghanistan arrived in Australia to begin their new lives in safety.

Charges were dropped against a New South Wales legal observer

“Under NSW’s new and dangerous anti-protest laws, back in June a volunteer Legal Observer faced a maximum sentence of 2 years in jail and a $22,000 fine, after being arrested alongside 34 protesters.

“Amnesty made representations to the NSW police, calling on them to respect the right to protest, as well as the human rights of the Legal Observer. In August, her charges were dropped. Over 30,000 supporters continue to call on the NSW police to protect our right to protest.

“Legal Observers play a vital role in monitoring police & providing legal support to protesters. Thanks to the relentless advocacy from Amnesty International, Legal Observers NSW and Sydney City Crime, my charges have been recently dropped.” – Chloe Sinclair, Legal Observer

Texas: Ramiro Gonzalez’ execution was stayed

“Back in July, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (TCCA) stayed the execution for Ramiro Gonzales – just 48 hours before it was due to be carried out in Texas. Experts concluded that Ramiro does not pose a threat of future danger to society, due to the passage of time and his significant maturity. As of April 2021, 108 countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes and 144 countries have abolished it in law or practice – all thanks to the power of ordinary people, continuing to stand up for what’s right! Our fight for global abolition continues.

People power freed Ahmed Samir Santawy from prison in Egypt

“Back in July, Ahmed Samir Santawy, a women’s rights and reproductive rights researcher, was convicted of spreading “false news” and sentenced to three years imprisonment. He was subjected to enforced disappearance for five days. Ahmed’s conviction was based solely on social media posts criticising human rights violations in Egypt.

“Over 10,000 people in Australia signed the petition demanding Ahmed’s release, and almost 5,000 people called the Egyptian embassy, putting further pressure on authorities – and it worked. In August, Ahmed was finally released from prison after being given a presidential pardon. Thank you for helping free Ahmed!

Ahmed reunites with his loved ones on the day of his release. ©Wies De Graeve

New York: We sued the NYPD for surveillance of protesters – and we won!

“In New York, facial recognition technology has been used to target people of colour in protests. Back in 2020, we asked the the New York Police Department (NYPD) to publish their data on facial recognition – and they refused. So we mapped their surveillance cameras with the help of 7,000 supporters, filed a lawsuit against them, and won.

“In August, they were ordered to disclose thousands of records of how they procured and used facial recognition technology against Black Lives Matter (BLM) protesters. This ruling recognizes that the NYPD broke the law in withholding this information and is a significant step in holding the NYPD accountable for its use of discriminatory surveillance.

LGBTQIA+ liberation soared across the globe 

“Thanks to LGBTQIA+ people and their allies at the forefront, back in July Switzerland’s same-sex marriage laws finally came into effect after overwhelming support of its legalisation in a national referendum last year. In August, the government of Singapore passed historic legislation to end LGBTQIA+ criminalisation. Shortly after, Vietnamese authorities said that being LGBTQIA+ should not be treated as an illness. The Vietnamese Ministry of Health called on medical professionals to ensure LGBTQIA+ people are not discriminated against, calling for an end to dangerous conversion practices – something over 40,000 supporters in Australia continue to campaign against, too. Solidarity!”

It is good to report successes from time to time.

(From and Amnesty message – lightly edited. The original contained photographs)

1

Human Rights records of PM candidates


Link to post by Each Other of the human rights records of the prime ministerial candidates

July 2022

It will be down to two candidates by tonight (20 July 2022) but the review by EachOther of the human rights records of the four candidates is instructive. We already posted the worrying record of Rishi Sunak, currently in the lead. This link adds more detail.

0

Threats to our rights


July 2022

List of acts and bills which, individually and collectively, impinge on our rights

There is mounting concern that the tide of legislation currently in the process of enactment, will shift power away from the people and give greater powers to the police and the government itself.

Enacted legislation:

Police, Crime, Sentencing and Court Act 2022

Elections Act 2022

Nationality and Borders Act 2022

Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022

Serious Threats from current bills

Bill of Rights

National Security Bill

Online Safety Bill

Public Order Bill

Lesser Threats – collectively Important

Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill

Brexit Freedoms Bill

Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill

Modern Slavery Bill

Draft Victims Bill

Data Reform Bill

Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions Bill

Conversion Therapy Bill

Draft Mental Health Act Reform Bill

Energy Bill

Private Renters Bill

Social Housing Regulation Bill

Schools Bill

Possible Threat – under consideration

Locking On

The above is just a list. Below we provide a little more explanation and a brief summary of what they are about.

Some do not attack Human Rights directly. Rather they undermine our access to our human rights or circumvent them altogether so although we may have in law a ‘right’ we cannot, or will not be able, in some circumstances enforce them or rely on them for protection.

What is important is their collective impact. They each chip away here and there at our rights, and some expressly bypass Human Rights legislation (whether the HRA of Bill of Rights). Secondly, they demonstrate the little importance the current governments attach to our liberties, freedoms and our right to express our opinions. Thirdly, the very clear trend they represent to ever greater centralised government control. If they are all enacted and become law then the government will have increased their control significantly. The National Security Bill and the Public Order Bill combined could result in a Police State.

Summaries of what some of the bills and acts contain:

Serious Threats
Bill of RightsA government power grab.  It is a much weakened version of the 1998 Human Rights Act.
National Security BillMinisters and UK officials cannot be charged for crimes they order or encourage overseas – ordering assassinations or the commission of war crimes. It puts the government above challenge, undermines our right to hold government accountable, giving us less say, and government becomes more authoritarian and closer to becoming a dictatorship.
Online Safety BillIntended to protect the right of free speech and expression, prevent the circulation of misinformation, threats and unsavoury content, particularly in social media, but it will not apply to the government and those in public office. Gives more control to the government.
Could be used to stop criticism of the government.
Public Order BillAn extension of the Police and Crime Bill. It has been described as authoritarian and repressive. It gives the police wide discretion and greater powers, introduces control orders and enables stop and search without reason.
Lesser Threats
Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) BillNot compatible with Human Rights. Bypasses police, courts, protections and enables substantial government interference in the process of law and the right of defence/protection.
Brexit Freedoms BillGetting rid of and remaining EU protections.
Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) BillPrevents Universities and Student Unions blocking [no-platforming] speakers thus enabling ‘objectionable opinions’ to be validated. Especially Far-Right, anti LGBT and racism views.
Modern Slavery Bill
Draft Victims BillIt doesn’t protect personal data, from excess police intrusion or provide sufficient support for marginalised groups.
Data Reform BillScraps GDPR ‘red tape’ and lowers barriers to restrict access to personal data.
Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions BillComplex. BDS is an Israeli/Palestine issue. The wider context is about using BDS to control ‘overseas’ issues. The bill gives greater central control to government.
Conversion Therapy Bill
Draft Mental Health Act Reform BillWe have a right to good mental health, and to be treated with dignity and respect. Questionable protections under the Bill of Rights.
Energy BillUndermines the right to affordable energy, safe energy good for the environment, climate, not to be cut-off, not to be forced to have repayment meters.
Private Renters BillConflicts with HRs and gives government Renters Ombudsman opportunity to ignore HRs (peaceful possession/occupation). Complex overlapping with property law. Could be good for renters but shifts final say away from HRs to the government decisions. Renters will not be able to use HRs to challenge Ombudsman decisions.
Social Housing Regulation BillGives central government greater control, the discretion to side step HRs
Schools BillGives Government great control over education to FE level. Has the potential to remove teachers/schools not following an agreed narrative. To close schools without notice or appeal.
Possible Threat
Locking OnMaking Locking-on a specific criminal offence.

Mike Hodgson

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑