worldwide opinions

news - current affairs - politics

Powered by Blogger.
Showing posts with label Civil Liberties. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Civil Liberties. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

A Mandate for the Malicious

 The Register are covering the story of John Pinnington, a former headmaster who has lost his job because an enhanced security check revealed unsubstantiated rumours about him.

"A recent landmark ruling by the High Court takes the UK one step closer to becoming an “informant society” along the lines of the former East Germany or Soviet Union."

I have no idea about the veracity of the allegations against Mr Pinnington, but the idea that someone's life can be ruined by little more than tittle tattle is not only shocking, but against everything the UK legal system is supposed to stand for. I have children at school so of course I agree with security checks, but I'm more concerned about dedicated and talented teachers leaving the education system only to be replaced by those who are squeaky clean but otherwise second rate.

Teaching is a poorly paid occupation with, in many cases, a high level of stress and responsibility. At the time of writing, the profession finds it hard to recruit graduates with good degrees. Adding yet another disincentive will only serve to further deter the very people who would be of most benefit to young minds. Why on earth would these people want to teach when they can earn considerably more doing a job which does not expose them to the risk of public humiliation and ruin!

What is (or should be) of concern to us all is the idea that an individual is no longer considered innocent unless proven guilty - a system which has served us well for centuries - instead gossip and spite are seen as proof of guilt. In an ideal world, no one would ever make false allegations against another person. However, out here in the real world people do, even children. The law should serve to protect the innocent from such claims, not to give a mandate to the malicious.
Posted by Kate at 10:09 am No comments:
Labels: Civil Liberties, Democracy, education, human rights, justice, uk law, uk politics

Thursday, June 12, 2008

David Davies resigns on point of principle

David Davies, Conservative MP and shadow home secretary has resigned following the government victory in the 42 day detention vote.

"He told reporters outside the Commons: 'I will argue in this by-election against the slow strangulation of fundamental British freedoms by this government.'"


Read the full story
Posted by Kate at 12:23 pm 3 comments:
Labels: Civil Liberties, Democracy, Elections, gordon brown, human rights, uk law, uk politics

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Judge not, lest ye be judged

A leaked document published in The Times yesterday outlines a government proposal to encourage council employees, doctors and charity workers to inform the authorities about anyone they believe may, possibly, be violent.

What a great idea! Lets not worry about silly, little things like evidence, or being innocent until proven guilty, lets just lock up anyone who looks a bit funny, or acts in a manner we don't agree with. It doesn't matter if they haven't actually done anything illegal, it's best to be on the safe side. And I'd like to get the ball rolling with the following tip off.

I have discovered that an organised group in this country have been responsible for the deaths of thousands of people over the last few years. None of the group's members are in the least bit sorry for this. In fact, several have stated that they feel a sense of pride and would happily do the same thing again. Clearly, this bunch have a major capacity for violence. The leader even admitted that he believed God had made him commit these acts. Now, if that isn't a sign of mental illness I don't know what is. 

If the powers that be wish to curb the activities of this gang they will find them hanging around Downing Street and the Houses of Parliament. Well, all except the above mentioned leader, he has fled the country.
Posted by Kate at 10:06 am 3 comments:
Labels: Civil Liberties, NuLabour, uk politics

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

NO CAFTA EN COSTA RICA

From our heart we, the people, will decide our future. Check HERE


Costa Rica Still hasnt signed the CAFTA agreement simply because after 40 years of real democracy, social development and solidarity we have a LOT more to loose than our poor and desperate neighbors…

Want to know the results of this so called FREE TRADE AGREEMENT? Well just look at Mexico, who’s been aplying it for almost ten years: there is more and more illegal immigration to the US, a couple of megacorporations have taken hold of corn and many mexican people can no longer afford their daily tortillas:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/business/newsid_6319000/6319405.stm

Telmex now owns 90% of the mexican telecommunication market and its mexican tycoon Carlos Slim threatens Bill Gates as the worlds riches man according to Forbes 2007 report.. talk about free trade… ever try calling form a Mexican pay phone or cell phone… well its a rip off!!

http://www.laopinion.com/supp7/?rkey=00070413040818623343

Fortunately some americans are waking up (not Bush & Co. who will forever be in never ever fast cash land) and realizing that by sowing poverty and injustice you will only reap… more poverty and injustice…

The Democrats pressure for serious environmental, worker protection and generic drugs access ammendments in the Central American Free Treaty is a step forward but it will takemany years of continued efforts to compensate for decades of Gung Ho foreign policies and plain dumb reagonomics in Central America!

Jorge Albán


Posted by Julia Ardón at 2:23 pm No comments:
Labels: Central America, Civil Liberties, Costa Rica, Democracy, Fair Trade, Freedom, Latin America, political

Sunday, May 06, 2007

Referendum CAFTA Costa Rica


More information: TLC NO!
In Costa Rica, the people will decide if the U.S. Governemet Trade is OK or not. All Central American countries was signed a non equitative law, and Costa Rica is delaying...Now the popular clamor help that the autorities accept a popular and massive referendum.
This will be maybe at september.
Excuse my english, again.
Julia
Posted by Julia Ardón at 4:08 pm No comments:
Labels: Central America, Civil Liberties, Costa Rica, Democracy, EU, Fair Trade, Latin America

Thursday, May 03, 2007

The Stealthy Erosion of our Civil Liberties

Writing for the Comment is Free section of the Guardian, Henry Porter discusses the current UK government's track record on civil liberties - or, more accurately, the apparent removal of many of our freedoms by stealth.

I feel quite strongly about this subject, and have written about it in the past. I'm not a great believer in conspiracy theories, and I don't spend my time fretting that the government is out to get me, but, this gradual erosion of basic rights and liberties - which go back centuries in some cases - is deeply worrying. Maybe, this government are telling the truth and are only doing these things because they believe they will protect the people of this country. Maybe, they would never dream of using these powers for any malign purpose, but that doesn't mean a future, less ethical government would behave in the same wa.

We are in danger of losing freedoms our forebears fought long and hard for, and sadly, a large number of people seem to be prepared to let this happen. Some, are simply unaware of the situation, others feel it's all for the greater good. 'If you have nothing to hide . . .' they say. To them I ask this: If you have nothing to hide, why do you have curtains at your windows? Why don't you tell every Tom, Dick and Harry your PIN? Why don't you discuss your entire medical history with the queue at the bus stop? Is it possibly because some things are private?

The issue isn't whether anyone has anything to hide. It's a simple matter of living free from state monitoring and interference. Or, to put it another way: When you get up in the morning you put on clean knickers/pants, you wouldn't expect your mother to come around to your house to check you had. If she did you would feel very silly, and rather offended. Surely, she should trust you as a grown adult to put clean underwear on in the morning? Well, yes she should, and the government should trust us all to behave like responsible citizens too! The money spent on badly designed and intrusive schemes would be better spent on more police officers to enforce the laws we already have.

In my previous post I quoted Shami Chakrabarti, I'll repost the quote here because I think it is pertinent.

"If you throw live frogs into a pan of boiling water, they will sensibly jump out and save themselves. If you put them in a pan of cold water and gently apply heat until the water boils they will lie in the pan and boil to death. It's like that." - Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty


If, like me, you would rather not go down the boiled frog route, try the following links:

  • No2ID – campaigning against id cards and a state database.
  • Charter 88 - campaign for a fair democracy.
  • Liberty - UK civil liberties and human rights organisation.
  • The Big Opt Out - campaign to protect the confidentiality of medical records.
  • Leave The Kids Alone - campaigning to end the practice of finger-printing children in schools.
  • The outcome for the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill
Posted by Kate at 6:02 pm 2 comments:
Labels: Civil Liberties, Democracy, EU, Freedom, UK, uk politics

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill and the Germans...

The "Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill" bares an uncanny resemblance to another bill passed prior to World War 2.

The Enabling Act (Ermächtigungsgesetz in German) was passed by Germany's parliament (the Reichstag) on March 23, 1933. It was the second major step after the Reichstag Fire Decree through which the Nazis obtained dictatorial powers using largely legal means. The Act enabled Chancellor Adolf Hitler and his cabinet to enact laws without the participation of the Reichstag.

-- Enabling Act, wikipedia


Having written to Mr R. Gale (my MP) I have gotten a reply. I asked him for his views on the subject but instead I got copies of the current paperwork on the topic.

I shall have to assume that this means that he is calling a safety and not voicing an opinion.

"...you will note that Her Majesty's opposition - which of course I am a member - made stringent efforts to oppose the offensive sections of the Bill but the government has of course used its majority to force many measures through..."
Roger Gale MP


He claims that the Labour party used it's majority to force the issue. This "majority" is so slight that they require the support of the Conservative party to be sure to get a bill through (especially if the "back benchers" revolt).

So what's going on here? Have Labour suddenly found power that commentary has over looked or are the big three secretly in favour of this bill?

Mr Gale voted against the Bill during it's third reading on 16 May 2006 (He also voted against ID cards on 16 & 21 Mar 2006).

I doubt, then, that this issue of what is happening on a party political scale reflects directly on Mr Gale but it gives me cause to worry nonetheless.

Catch up on the issues here and here. This article contains substansive text taken from another article by the same author found here.
Posted by Matt the Hat at 11:33 am 1 comment:
Labels: Big Brother., Civil Liberties, Democracy, UK, uk constitution, uk politics
Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)