http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin News items connected with the bulletin Copyright 2011 2011-08-16T08:11:04+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/volunteer_positions_africa_programme/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/volunteer_positions_africa_programme/ Interights Established over 25 years ago, INTERIGHTS works to promote respect for human rights through the use of law. We achieve this through a range of activities: strategic litigation through co-representation, legal support to applicants and third party interventions before international, regional, and national human rights courts and bodies; advising lawyers on the use of international and comparative human rights law before their domestic courts; building capacity through litigation partnerships, targeted training activities and internships, and through the dissemination of legal information. Thematically, our priorities are equality, Security and the Rule of Law (including counter-terrorism), and Economic and Social Rights (ESR). INTERIGHTS currently focuses its activities in Africa, the Commonwealth, Europe, the Middle East and North Africa, and South Asia.  Volunteers provide valuable legal research and drafting assistance to our lawyers, helping with the preparation of legal briefs, training materials and publications on human rights. Given the nature of our work, only candidates who have studied or are about to complete legal studies should apply.  These are unpaid positions but we will reimburse out of pocket expenses of a travel card zone 1-6 and up to £5 a day for lunch. Volunteers are required to provide receipts to claim these expenses. Interights is seeking two volunteers: Volunteer 1 This volunteer will undertake a comparative study of the communications procedure before regional human rights mechanisms, legal aid systems before regional human rights mechanisms, and special mechanisms and communications procedures. The successful candidate will: Be a law graduate or be entering their final year of law school (LLM graduates or students desirable) Demonstrate knowledge of international human rights mechanisms (particular knowledge of the African system would be an advantage) Demonstrate an interest in international human rights law Demonstrate excellent legal research skills Be fluent in English, with outstanding English drafting skills Have the right to work in the UK Volunteer 2 This volunteer will provide research assistance for case work. The successful candidate will: Be a law graduate or be entering their final year of law school (LLM graduates or students desirable) Demonstrate knowledge of international human rights mechanisms (particular knowledge of the African system would be an advantage) Demonstrate an interest in international human rights law Demonstrate excellent legal research skills Be fluent in English, with outstanding English drafting skills Experience of litigation or case work research would be desirable. Have the right to work in the UK To apply, please send your cover letter, curriculum vitae and an unedited writing sample of no more than 2,000 words to jobs@interights.org, by 14 August 2011. Please ensure that you state the title of the volunteer position that you are applying for in the subject line. Given the volume of interest in these positions, we regret that we are unable to engage in correspondence about the appropriateness of your application. INTERIGHTS will only contact shortlisted candidates. Interights is committed to equal opportunities 2011-08-16T07:11:04+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/3rd_european_court_of_human_rights_moot_court_competition_strasbourg_8_apri/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/3rd_european_court_of_human_rights_moot_court_competition_strasbourg_8_apri/ The 2011 UCL European Court of Human Rights Moot was for the third consecutive year successfully organized by the UCL Students’ Human Rights Programme in collaboration with the UCL Institute for Human Rights. After two phases of elimination rounds, held at UCL and judged by such distinguished personalities as Lord Kerr, the Finals were conducted at the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg. The finalists had the privilege to argue before their Excellencies, Judge Chr. Rozakis, Judge D. Spielmann and Judge S. E. Jebbens. A privilege they fully exploited, extracting remarkable comments from the judges. Having to argue on the hypothetical case of Mr. Efi Altis against VZN and the Plain of Phlegra, the finalists were to prepare two grounds. The first involved Articles 7 and 14 on facts that resembled those of Scoppola (No.2) and the Damjanovic and Maktouf applications. The second involved Articles 4 and 3 of Protocol No. 1, namely forced labour and the prisoners’ right to vote. Mr. Martin Reynolds was awarded Best Oralist, Mr. Azusa Kikuma Second Best Oralist, Miss Sarah Walker Third Best Oralist and Mr. Joseph Markus received an Honorary Mention for making it to the Finals. The ECtHR Moot which started off as a means to promote awareness of the ECHR has now turned into an established path of communication between academia and the highest level of judiciary. Not only can UCL Law students practice their advocacy skills but they are moreover provided with a chance not afforded in most moots: namely to put their arguments to the test before the actual Court. With even higher aspirations then for the years to come, congratulations to all the participants! Created with Admarket’s flickrSLiDR. 2011-05-08T10:56:34+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/ucl_echr_moot_semi_finals_4_march_2011/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/ucl_echr_moot_semi_finals_4_march_2011/ Exceeding all expectations the Semi-Finals proved to be a highly accredited academic event attracting a rather significant audience. The panel of judges included Lord Kerr and highly esteemed practitioners of human rights law such as Ms. J. Kinghan, Mr. S. Ollesson and Ms H. Mountfield. The Semi-Finals were conducted at Bentham House, UCL and were followed by a small reception where Lord Kerr offered a rather intriguing insight to the law profession, discussing also the requirements for pursuing a career at the Bar. We are most pleased to congratulate the Finalists as announced after the reception: Azusa Kikuma, Joseph Markus, Samuel Martin Reynolds, Sarah Walker. The Finals are scheduled for the 8th of April in the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg. The case of the Semi-Finals which reflected the rather controversial application of the Chagos Islanders before the European Court of Human Rights can be found HERE March 2011 2011-05-08T10:02:05+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/new_constitution/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/new_constitution/ The Programme went through a process of redrafting its Constitution from January to April 2011. This was done by a Constitution Committee, which any member of the Programme was free to join. Please find a draft copy HERE [PDF]. It has not been finalised, but will be ratified before the summer, barring last minute changes. 2011-04-29T21:47:35+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/welcome_to_the_uclshrp_alumni_newsletter/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/welcome_to_the_uclshrp_alumni_newsletter/ Welcome to the first edition of the UCLSHRP Alumni Newsletter, a new biannual update to keep you informed about the Programme’s activities, and to help you stay in touch with other alumni. John Galsworthy said “the beginnings and endings of all human undertakings are untidy‟ – hopefully this won’t be too bad; but I welcome your comments on how the newsletter might be improved, so please drop me an email at alumni@uclshrp.com and share your thoughts. The newsletter is just one part of a broader Alumni scheme which will provide benefits including priority booking for ticketed UCLSHRP events, Bulletin emails, discounts on the UCL Human Rights Review and more. If you would like to opt out of the scheme, please send an email to the above address. download! Alumni officer: Fiona Whiteside Contact: alumni@uclshrp.com 2011-04-12T22:03:52+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/3rd_european_court_of_human_rights_moot_court_competition_strasbourg_8_apri/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/3rd_european_court_of_human_rights_moot_court_competition_strasbourg_8_apri/ The 2011 UCL European Court of Human Rights Moot was for the third consecutive year successfully organized by the UCL Students’ Human Rights Programme in collaboration with the UCL Institute for Human Rights. After two phases of elimination rounds, held at UCL and judged by such distinguished personalities as Lord Kerr, the Finals were conducted at the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg. The finalists had the privilege to argue before their Excellencies, Judge Chr. Rozakis, Judge D. Spielmann and Judge S. E. Jebbens. A privilege they fully exploited, extracting remarkable comments from the judges. Having to argue on the hypothetical case of Mr. Efi Altis against VZN and the Plain of Phlegra, the finalists were to prepare two grounds. The first involved Articles 7 and 14 on facts that resembled those of Scoppola (No.2) and the Damjanovic and Maktouf applications. The second involved Articles 4 and 3 of Protocol No. 1, namely forced labour and the prisoners’ right to vote. Mr. Martin Reynolds was awarded Best Oralist, Mr. Azusa Kikuma Second Best Oralist, Miss Sarah Walker Third Best Oralist and Mr. Joseph Markus received an Honorary Mention for making it to the Finals. The ECtHR Moot which started off as a means to promote awareness of the ECHR has now turned into an established path of communication between academia and the highest level of judiciary. Not only can UCL Law students practice their advocacy skills but they are moreover provided with a chance not afforded in most moots: namely to put their arguments to the test before the actual Court. With even higher aspirations then for the years to come, congratulations to all the participants! MORE. 2011-04-08T09:16:05+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/arrest_of_bloggers_in_azerbaijan/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/arrest_of_bloggers_in_azerbaijan/ Amnesty International has accused Azerbaijan of using fabricated charges in order to clamp down on public dissent. The accusations come in the wake of the Azerbaijani courts upholding the charge of “hooliganism” against Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli in their recent court appeals. The pair, heavily involved with peaceful political groups were arrested following their posting of a satirical video on YouTube. The video featured a mock press conference hosted by a donkey in reference to a recent importing of donkeys from Germany. There have been accusations of corruption in connection with the deal worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. They have been given prison sentences of two and two and a half years respectively. Amnesty International has drawn attention to irregularities in the case, such as denying two key witnesses the right to give evidence. “They were convicted on fabricated charges in a trial falling short of international standards for fairness solely because they were expressing their views” said Andrea Huber of Amnesty International. She went on to say that “Independent journalists and activists continue to face harassment and imprisonment in Azerbaijan despite the country’s international obligations to uphold the right to freedom of expression.” Azerbaijan scored 146 out of 175 in Reporters Sans Frontiers’ latest worldwide index.  August 2010 2010-08-01T16:30:53+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/censorship_of_public_criticism_in_saudi_arabia/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/censorship_of_public_criticism_in_saudi_arabia/ Human Rights watch has appealed to the Saudi Arabian government to reform its broad and ambiguous libel laws following the arrest of blogger Nasir al-Subai’i. The suspect was arrested under the Law to Combat Information Crimes, issued in March 2007, due to his public criticism of the Saudi bureaucracy while trying to secure reimbursement for his brother’s healthcare. Under Saudi law, the state is obliged to pay for foreign healthcare when it is not available domestically. After Nasir’s brother, Muhammad fell into a coma as a result of a traffic accident in March 2007, Nasir acquired approval from King Abdullah for Muhammad to receive medical treatment in China and USA. However, after not being reimbursed by the Ministry of Health, al-Subai’i followed official channels of grievances, including writing letters and a lawsuit against the Ministry. Eventually, in early 2009 he resorted to documenting his frustration on a youtube blog and spoke on Lebanese and Saudi Arabian television. He was arrested in July 2009 and is currently on bail. Al-Subai’i was arrested under a recent law which has been called “overbroad” by Human Rights Watch. The law punishes “libelling others… by means of information technology” and “producing anything that of its nature contests public order… or the inviolability of private life”. This law contradicts the UN Resolution on the Rights of Human Rights Defenders 1999. Article 9.2 of the resolution protects “everyone whose rights or freedoms are allegedly violated ... to complain to and have that complaint promptly reviewed in a public hearing before an independent, impartial and competent judicial or other authority established by law”. August 2010 2010-08-01T16:28:31+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/jamaican_young_offenders_caught_up_in_prison_riots/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/jamaican_young_offenders_caught_up_in_prison_riots/ The shortcomings of Jamaica’s correctional system were again highlighted this month after a riot at the Horizon Adult Remand centre. Forty people were injured during the riot in a facility which is temporarily housing thirty-three juveniles. The riot at the Remand Centre is believed to have been caused by very poor conditions in which the inmates live. Police and military were sent in and are believed to have over-reacted. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Manfred Nowak, and a delegation from the UN visited ten days later and investigated the event. Its medical expert, Derrick Pounder reported that inmates “uniformly had head injuries from multiple blows to the head. Some had been knocked unconscious and didn’t recover consciousness until they got to the hospitals. But the most telling of the injuries were the pattern, what we would call defensive injuries, injuries inflicted when a person tried to protect themselves from harm.” Those juveniles who are in Young Offenders institutes are also exposed to human rights abuses. The head of the UN team, Manfred Nowak noted that St. Andrew Juvenile Centre for boys had a system of repression and regular corporal punishment. A fire in an Armadale Juvenile Correctional Centre in St Ann last year killed seven teenage girls. A local human rights pressure group, Jamaicans for Justice, has called for the resignation of the head Jamaica’s correctional system. Due to the current instabilities, plans to build a new facility to house 250 young offenders in St James have been put on hold indefinitely.  August 2010 2010-08-01T16:26:23+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/violence_against_transgender_people_in_turkey/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/violence_against_transgender_people_in_turkey/ Several human rights organisations, including Human Rights Watch and other LGBT groups, have sent an open letter to the Turkish government calling for the protection of transgender people from violent attacks. The letter was sent after two murders of transgender women in February 2010. The letter called on further co-operation between LGBT groups and the police, anti-discrimination legislation, and government pro-activity in preventing violence directed against transgender people.  In two Turkish cities alone, there have been at least eight murders of transgender people since November 2008. Such attacks often occur in gruesome circumstances, such as the murder of Sinasi Halimoglu who had arranged a date with a man. He was later found on his bed with multiple stab wounds to his back and neck. “The homophobic killings need to stop, and for this we need the Turkish government to take concrete action to protect transgender people,” said Hossein Alizadeh, coordinator of International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission’s Middle East and North Africa program. The Turkish police force has in the past been accused of harassing Turkey’s transgender community. These actions have been documented by Human Rights Organizations such as Pembe Hayat. However, in recent attacks against LGBT people, the Turkish Police Force has fully investigated the crimes and bought the perpetrators to justice. The Turkish state will need to be seen to protect the rights of sexual minorities in its attempt to join the EU. Commentators have emphasised that investigating such crimes does not go far enough; what is sought are positive steps for the protection of the transgender minority within Turkey.  August 2010 2010-08-01T16:25:25+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/equal_rights_trust_launches_report_on_stateless_persons/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/equal_rights_trust_launches_report_on_stateless_persons/ On Monday 19th July 2010 The Equal Rights Trust (ERT) launched its report “Unravelling Anomaly: Detention, Discrimination and the Protection Needs of Stateless Persons”. The report, which is the result of two years of research, reflection and debate, is ERT’s contribution to a growing body of expertise on statelessness and it was developed with the support of the UCLSHRP research team, particularly working on stateless Palestinians in the Middle East. The team was made up of (in alphabetical order) Tony Daly, Amy E O’Donnell, Isaac Joory,Gabriela L Sibley, Shirin N Taghizadeh and Natalie Tomlinson. Stateless persons are those who have no nationality, or whose nationality is ineffective. This report approaches the subject through the prism of detention - a crucial issue which offers unique insight into the broader challenge of statelessness. The stateless person, who cannot legally travel, reside in a country, work, study or receive health care, and whose life is a tightrope walk along the dividing line between legality and illegality, is often at heightened risk of detention. How a state treats stateless detainees is a reflection of how committed it is to protect those whose rights are most at risk. Amal De Chickera, lead researcher and coordinator of the project, stated: “In 1949 the UN described stateless persons – marginalised from society – as an “anomaly”. This was because legal systems were ill-equipped to deal with them. Sixty years later, the stateless remain an anomaly and continue to be marginalised. In this report, ERT attempts to unravel the anomaly.” The report finds that inequality and discrimination lie at the heart of the statelessness problem, as does the eternal tug-of-war between universal human rights and national sovereignty. It also finds that many persons who are held in long term immigration detention “awaiting removal” are in reality stateless, and therefore cannot be removed. The report argues that statelessness should primarily be seen as a human rights issue, that the UNHCR and human rights treaty bodies should work in partnership to address the challenge, that all countries should implement statelessness determination procedures and that authoritative guidelines should be developed to regulate the detention of stateless persons. FULL REPORT 2010-07-21T10:23:08+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/romanian_discrimination_against_roma_population/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/romanian_discrimination_against_roma_population/ Amnesty International released a report this week highlighting the plight of Roma across Europe particularly in Romania, entitled ‘Treated like waste: Roma homes destroyed, and health at risk, in Romania’. The report focuses on an incident in 2004 where over one hundred Roma were evicted from their homes in central Miercurea Ciuc and forced by local authorities to relocate into ‘temporary’ settlements next to a sewage plant. ‘The houses fill up with that smell,’ explained Ilana, a resident at the settlement, ‘at night the children cover their faces with their pillows’. Defying Romanian law, the municipal authorities have placed the Roma within a 300 metre protection zone around the sewage plant, a law designed to protect public health. Moreover, there is desperate overcrowding, offending the human dignity of Roma. Erszebet, another resident complained that, ‘it is tight, when the whole family goes to sleep we don’t fit in. We cannot take a bath; we cannot clean ourselves. It is too small. We don’t want the older girls to take a bath in front of their father.’ Miercurea Ciuc is not an isolated case, but an example of widespread discrimination against Roma across the Balkans. As Halya Gowan of Amnesty International said that ‘this pattern of forced evictions, without adequate consultation, adequate notice or adequate alternative housing, perpetuates racial segregation and violates Romania’s international obligations.’ Although official census figures place Romania’s Roma population at 535,000 or 2.4% of the population, Amnesty International believes that there are 2.2million Roma in Romania constituting 10% of the population. Whereas 24% of Romanians live in property, the proportion of Roma living in poverty is believed to be 75%. The report adds to the growing evidence of segregation and discrimination against Roma. Europe’s Roma population live on the fringes of society and often struggle to be integrated into mainstream society. Some live as legal tenants but the vast majority live on land that is not protected by the law, consolidating their vulnerability. Violence against Roma has accelerated recently as the far-right’s appeal becomes stronger against a bleak economic backdrop. An unexpected effect of this was a surge in asylum applications in Canada from Roma in the Czech Republic who are fleeing discrimination. 2010-02-15T18:00:45+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/zanu_pf_land_seizures/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/zanu_pf_land_seizures/ One year into Zimbabwe’s unity government, President Robert Mugabe’s ZANU-PF party is continuing its policy of confiscating land owned by white farmers. One million farm workers have also now been made both landless and jobless; 100,000 of which have found employment in farms in South Africa. Three major estates have been confiscated by ZANU-PF since February 2009. This is in contradiction to a ruling by the Southern African Development Community (SADC) which in November 2008 declared the planned expropriation of land from 78 white farmers as discriminatory on the basis of race, and therefore illegal. This week, the Chipinge Magistrates Court ordered another four white farmers to leave their farms. Nehanda Radio labelled the ruling, ‘an act of legal vandalism of the highest order’. This comes amidst reports by Commercial Farmers Union that soldiers have been deployed across the country to pressurise white farmers into packing their bags. When land redistribution started in 2000, ZANU-PF promised an improved standard of living for farm labourers. However, the situation quickly deteriorated. A former farm labourer described the situation: ‘some ZANU-PF youth went around hitting and raping farm workers and beating them to death. Farm labourers were thrown out of the farms with their employers and some farmers ran away without paying anything to farm workers’. Despite promises of resettlement, 60,000 displaced persons are now living in makeshift camps waiting for the government to resettle them. The children of these of these families are receiving no education. The most disadvantaged are members of Tsvangirai’s MDC who are unlikely to receive compensation. Landless people in Zimbabwe have called on the government to take the land from members of ZANU-PF and redistribute it to smallholders. Meanwhile, there is a small but growing call in South Africa for the government to seize land from mostly white landowners. ‘I see in South Africa, the land is currently in the hands of whites,’ said Johannesburg based academic Stephen Greenberg, ‘you need to have a move here towards taking control of the economy, and then once the economy is in blacks’ hands, move towards the land’. 2010-02-15T17:57:09+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/israel_attacks_on_new_israel_fund_critical_groups_threaten_civil_society/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/israel_attacks_on_new_israel_fund_critical_groups_threaten_civil_society/ Human Rights Watch has drawn attention to increasing Israeli government repression of non-governmental organisations, including the New Israel Fund, a group which supports various Israeli civil rights and social welfare groups. The group has been investigated by a government commission, on the basis of its ‘harming the national interest of the state of Israel.’ New Israel Fund (NIF) was thought to have been supplying information which was used in Justice Richard Goldstone’s UN report and fact-finding mission abuses during the Gaza conflict in winter 2008/9. Daniel Sokatch, Chief executive officer of NIF appealed for support against growing official hostility towards its operations. He argued that an active and critical civil society is vital if Israel is fit to describe itself as a Middle Eastern democracy. Sarah Leah Whitson of Human Rights Watch commented: ‘what we’re seeing in Israel is a greater official intolerance of dissent’. NGOs are finding it increasingly difficult to operate in the West bank and some have been denied access to Gaza. Top Israeli officials have publicly described NGOs as threats to national security, and hundreds of Arab Israeli demonstrators protesting against the Gaza operation have been subjected to arrest and harassment.  Whitson commented further that: ‘One of Israel’s outstanding strengths has been its vibrant civil society and its flourishing public debate, so these developments are particularly worrying.’ 2010-02-15T17:50:11+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/refugee_camp_for_palestinian_refugees_closes/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/refugee_camp_for_palestinian_refugees_closes/ The UN refugee agency has closed the Al Tanf Refugee camp, situated between the Iraqi and Syrian borders. The camp had been accommodating Palestinian refugees from Iraq for almost four years. The remaining sixty camp residents have been transferred to a separate camp in Syria’s interior. Al Tanf camp was opened in May 2006 in response to a greater flow of Palestinians fleeing persecution in Iraq. The conditions in the desert camp were harsh, with little access to healthcare, extreme temperatures and an infestation of snakes and scorpions. The dangerous circumstances were highlighted by the death of a nine year old boy, Mohamed Kamal Ibrahim, in September 2008 in a road accident outside the camp. The closure of Al Tanf was undertaken by the Syrian government with assistance from UN agencies, the Palestinian Red Crescent and the Syrian Arab Red Crescent. Phillipe Leclerc of the UNHCR commented: ‘today we were able to close this camp and this is a very important step and achievement in responding on a humanitarian basis to the situation of people who were stranded there as a result of fleeing persecution.’ Palestinians have fled Iraq due to threats, torture and detention. There are currently over two thousand Palestinian refugees from Iraq currently living in refugee camps in Syria supplementing the 747,000 refugees from Iraq currently in Syria. Although the UNHCR has praised the ‘generous attitude’ of the Syrian authorities, life is difficult. The state turns a blind eye to informal employment but formal employment is prohibited. In the last four years, approximately one thousand Palestinians formerly living in Iraq have been relocated to third countries, mostly in Europe and South America. ‘We just want a place that welcomes us and recognizes us as human beings’ said Abu Mohanned, one of the refugees. The UNHCR (UN’s Refugee Agency) has said that it will continue to advocate for a dignified solution. 2010-02-15T17:37:28+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/fines_for_the_parents_of_rapist_for_failures_in_upbringing/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/fines_for_the_parents_of_rapist_for_failures_in_upbringing/ A landmark ruling in Milan resulted in the mothers and fathers of five teenage boys who repeatedly raped a young girl being ordered to pay the victim compensation of €450,000 due to their failure as parents to give their sons an ‘education in feelings and emotions’. The rapes took place over a two year period. The victim was a twelve-year-old girl, and her attackers were two or three years older. Judge Bianca La Monica awarded the damages against all the boys’ natural parents, including those who had separated from their partners and no longer had custody of their sons. On damages against parents no longer directly involved in the upbringing of their sons, she said that the law gave the non-custodial spouse not just the right, but the duty, to monitor the upbringing of a child. The judge stated that the five boys appeared to have no understanding of the gravity of what they had done, and it was only when they had been pressed to think about the effect of their behaviour on the victim that they had shown ‘glimmers of awareness’. The judge said this demonstrated that the accused had not been brought up ‘in a context of respect for the feelings, wishes and bodies of others’. In their defence, the boys’ parents had told the court that they had made sure their sons came home by a certain time. They testified that their children were brought up to be good Christians, and provided evidence of having ensured the boys attended sex education classes at school. In some instances, the point was been made that a boy involved had not shown any apparent interest in girls. The judge said that none of these claim in defence proved otherwise the fact that there was ‘no trace in the minors’ behaviour of an upbringing that provided for entering into non-physical relationships with others.’ 2010-02-15T17:29:36+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/high_court_rules_a_planned_ba_strike_unlawful/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/high_court_rules_a_planned_ba_strike_unlawful/ Mrs Justice Cox, sitting in the High Court, agreed with British Airways (BA) that Unite, the union representing cabin crew, had not correctly balloted its members on the proposed strike. This was because the ballot for a proposed twelve-day strike included workers that had already accepted voluntary redundancy. Around nine hundred cabin crew were balloted despite taking voluntary redundancy, which meant they would not be working for the airline at the time of any industrial action. Cox ruled that the balloting error breached the 1992 Trade Union Act. The injunction means the twelve-day strike, in protest over job losses and a pay freeze, cannot now go ahead. BA said it was delighted by the decision while Unite, which organised the ballot, said it was a ‘disgraceful day for democracy’. It said it would poll members again for industrial action after Christmas. A second ballot would take at least a month to organise. Mr Simpson and Unite’s other joint general secretary, Tony Woodley, said the dispute was ‘far from settled’. ‘While we have never wanted this dispute, it is a disgraceful day for democracy when a court can overrule such an overwhelming decision by employees taken in a secret ballot,’ they said. The original ballot saw 92.5% of those balloted vote in favour of industrial action. Industrial relations experts said Unite might struggle to secure a second big mandate from members for industrial action. A number of cabin crew questioned the length of the planned strike and Mr. Simpson, Unite’s joint general secretary, had said earlier this week that it was ‘probably over the top’. Because the union does not have a duty of care towards passengers, they have no right to sue the union, said Mark Meryon, industrial relations partner at the law firm Bircham Dyson Bell. ‘The threat of a strike is not enough to trigger a liability,’ Meryon said. BA’s ability to sue the union was also limited, he added 2010-01-26T08:01:39+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/cases/gillan_and_quinton_v_united_kingdom/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/cases/gillan_and_quinton_v_united_kingdom/ Facts: Mr Gillan and Ms Quinton lodged an appeal against the UK government claiming that the stop and search powers used against them where in violation of Articles 5 (right to liberty), 8 (right to a private and family life), 10 (right to freedom of expression) and 11 (freedom of assembly and of association) of the European Convention on Human Rights.  While on their way to a demonstration close to an arms fair, the claimants were both stopped and searched for over 20 minutes according to Articles 44 and 45 of the 2000 Terrorism Act. They applied for judicial review in the High Court, claiming that the use of stop and search powers during a demonstration such as the arms fair, were contrary to the legislative purpose of the Statute and that the use of these powers constituted a disproportionate interference with their rights protected under Articles 5, 8, 10 and 11. The case went up to the House of Lords, which rejected the appeal on the ground that the statute was drafted so as to allow the use of such powers when considered expedient ‘for the prevention of acts of terrorism’.  Lord Bingham held that a search did not constitute an infringement of the right to a private and family life. He further held that the statute was lawful. Lord Hope also added that the scope for intrusion allowed by the search powers was narrow, thus legitimate for the purpose of protecting the public from terrorism. Article 5: The Court held that even though the stop did not last for more than 30 minutes, the applicants had been completely deprived of their right to liberty under Article 5 during that time, since non -compliance with the stop and search order would have lead to criminal proceedings. There was however no need for the Court to express a final judgment on that point, as the decision was to depend on whether there was an infringement of Article 8 of the Convention. Article 8: The claimants submitted that the stop and search powers used by the police on them were qualitatively different from similar powers used in airports, since no prior notice nor agreement was given and since the search was conducted in a public place. As a result, they argued, there was an infringement of their right to autonomy and privacy under Article 8. The Court held that the stop and search powers allowing vigorous search in a public place constituted an infringement of Article 8. Did the infringement comply with national law in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 8 of the Convention? Relying on its previous case law, the Court held that despite the existence of certain restraints to the power conferred onto the police by the 2000 Act, these restraints were too limited. This lead to a clear risk of arbitrariness, as police officers had a very broad discretion in the exercise of their powers.  The Court concluded that the powers of authorisation and confirmation, as well as those of stop and search under sections 44 and 45 of the 2000 Act, were neither sufficiently circumscribed nor subject to adequate legal safeguards against abuse. It held, therefore, that they were not “in accordance with the law” and that there had been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention. 2010-01-25T20:24:41+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/unlawful_refusal_to_perform_civil_partnership_ceremonies/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/unlawful_refusal_to_perform_civil_partnership_ceremonies/ In a landmark case, the Court of Appeal upheld the previous ruling of the Employment Appeal Tribunal that Islington Council was right to expect its employee Ms Ladele to perform same sex civil partnerships in her role as Registrar. Ms Ladele’s religious beliefs consider same-sex partnerships as ‘contrary to God’s law’ and she refused to officiate in these ceremonies following the Civil Partnerships Act 2004. The Employment Tribunal initially ruled that she was the victim of religious discrimination, but this decision was overturned by the Employment Appeals Tribunal last December. Andrew Copson, of the British Humanist Association commented that the judgment made clear that in the context of public service providers, the rights of the individual employees do not ‘trump’ those of service users. They must ‘service users equally, with dignity and respect’. Mike Jones of the Christian Institute accused Islington Council of ‘making gay rights more important than religious rights’ and went to say that ‘this case will help squeeze out Christians from the public sphere because of their religious beliefs on ethical issues’. After the ruling he pledged to take the case to the Supreme Court. The Tribunal in July 2008 accused Islington Council of ‘trumping’ gay over religious rights. Conversely, gay rights group Stonewall welcomed the judgment and expressed pleasure that ‘the Court of Appeal has upheld the right of lesbian and gay people to receive public services from public servants.’ Liberty’s Corinna Ferguson hailed the ruling as a ‘common sense judgment’ and drew a line between this and examples of religious discrimination against people who are doing no harm. Liberty is representing Nadia Eweida next January when she argues that she was unfairly dismissed from British Airways for wearing a small cross while working on a check-in counter in an airport. The ruling in this case was also welcomed by the National Secular Society and the British Humanist Association. Further Reading: Christian Telegraph Anglican Mainstream Pink News christian.org 2010-01-25T20:01:05+00:00 http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/japan_urged_to_press_turkmenistan_on_human_rights_record/ http://www.uclshrp.com/bulletin/news/japan_urged_to_press_turkmenistan_on_human_rights_record/ Human Rights Watch has urged Japan to take advantage of the three-day state visit of Turkmen President Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov and press for concrete improvements in the state’s human rights record. Holly Cartner of Human Rights Watch described the Turkmen regime as ‘one of the most repressive in the world, on par with Burma and North Korea’. Japan’s official development aid (ODA) charter stipulates plainly decisions on aid should take into account the human rights record of the recipient country. Japan is only known to have invoked this principle in its decisions on aid to Burma and Zimbabwe, however. There are five points which Human Rights Watch feel should be particularly pressed on: the release of the large political prisoner community; transparency in the judicial process; lifting the ban on activists and easing the current travel restrictions; freedom of expression for activists and civic groups, and ensuring access for human rights monitors and UN officials. Turkmenistan is of strategic importance to western states because of its vast natural resources. Its former ‘self-declared president-for-life’, Saparmurat Niazov, died in December 2006, prompting hopes that the new regime would lose some of its authoritarian features. The new President Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov did reverse some of the measures previously imposed, such as the previous dictator’s decision to change the names of the months to those of his family members, but stopped short of establishing any genuine human rights reforms. This was highlighted by the arrest of political dissident Gulgedy Annaniazov who returned to his home country in June 2008 from Norway (where he holds refugee status) only to be arrested the next day and sentenced to eleven years in prison. There are, however, fears that human rights will be dwarfed by other issues during the visit, especially by that of energy resources and supply. Japan currently imports 90% of its crude energy resources from the Middle East. Russia recently stopped importing from Turkmenistan following a row which is costing Turkmenistan 1$bn a month, pushing Turkmenistan closer to other European and Asian countries. This visit comes soon after the Turkmenistan Oil and Gas forum in late November during which European oil companies competed for contracts. 2010-01-25T19:34:51+00:00