Social Items

TPQ
Showing posts with label Law Society Gazette. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Law Society Gazette. Show all posts
Law Society Gazette 👩🏿‍⚖️Written by Michael Cross. Recommended by Christy Walsh.

The frequently cited assumption that withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights would imperil the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement is mistaken, right of centre thinktank Policy Exchange argues today. 

The latest output from its human rights workstream, endorsed by several high-profile opponents ECHR withdrawal, states that nothing in the UK’s commitments to the peace process in Northern Ireland requires it to remain a part of the ECHR.

According to the report, only one of the two agreements making up the Good Friday Agreement refers to the ECHR, but these references all concern the domestic law of Northern Ireland and the need to provide assurances to the different parties that they will be secure from abuse of devolved power. Such assurances could be provided for in several ways after a UK withdrawal from the ECHR, such as by maintaining the Human Rights Act and the Northern Ireland Act in relation to the political institutions of Northern Ireland, the report argues.

Meanwhile, nothing in the 2023 Windsor Framework agreement prohibits the UK from withdrawing from the ECHR. '

ECHR Withdrawal 'Would Not Imperil Good Friday Agreement'

Law Society Gazette ★ Written by Bianca Castro. Recommended by Christy Walsh.

A recorder has been issued with formal advice for misconduct after an almost eight-month delay handing down a judgment.

Recorder James Howlett had not yet issued a reserved judgment in a case for ‘nearly eight months’ despite chasers from court staff and senior judges, some of which did not receive a response, the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office said.

It added: 

The guide to judicial conduct states that judicial office holders should display diligence and care in the discharge of their judicial duties.
‘The JCIO’s guidance on misconduct and recommending sanctions explains that a question of misconduct may arise where the time taken to complete a judgment exceeds three months from the conclusion of the hearing or trial.

The judge accepted his delay in issuing the judgment was unacceptable and apologised for his ‘failure to respond to enquiries about the matter’.

‘He attributed the delay to a combination of professional and personal pressures, acknowledged the seriousness of the matter and confirmed that he had sent the draft judgment to the court that day,’ the JCIO said. ‘He provided assurances that a similar incident would not occur in future.’

An investigation found the delay and the judge’s ‘repeated failure’ to respond to enquiries about the matter amounted to misconduct. Though the judge had a previously unblemished conduct record his ‘persistent lack of engagement’ was considered an aggravating factor.

The lady chief justice, with the lord chancellor’s agreement, issued Howlett with formal advice.

Judge Sanctioned Over Eight-Month Delay In Issuing Judgment

Law Society Gazette. ✎ Written by John Hyde. Recommended by Christy Walsh.

Prime minister Sir Keir Starmer was today due to respond to years of campaigning and announce a 'Hillsborough Law'. Legislation will be brought before next April to enforce a legal duty of candour on public authorities who are subject to investigations following major disasters.

The government is recruiting an independent public advocate to represent victims and their families and will provide funding to ensure groups have access to legal advice.

Starmer will announce the changes during his leader’s speech at the Labour party’s conference in Liverpool. The location is symbolic, given that the law will be named to commemorate the 97 Liverpool fans who lost their lives following a crush on the terraces at an FA Cup semi-final in Sheffield in April 1989.

Elkan Abrahamson, a solicitor with Liverpool firm Broudie Jackson Canter and a director of the Hillsborough Law Now campaign, said his organisation stands ready to help the government make this law a reality.

He added: ‘We and all the families are delighted to hear the renewed commitment from the prime minister that a Hillsborough Law will be brought in by next April.

Continue reading @ Law Society Gazette.

Lawyers’ Delight As ‘Hillsborough Law’ Set To Go Before Parliament

Law Society Gazette ✏ Written by Bianca Castro. Recommended by Christy Walsh.

A judge asked to consider the legality of prosecutions by railway operators using the single justice procedure has declared all prosecutions under two subsections of the Railways Act invalid.

Senior district judge and chief magistrate for England and Wales Paul Goldspring said railway operators Northern Trains Limited and Greater Anglia had conceded that the SJP should not have been used to prosecute offences contrary to section 5(1) or 5(3) of the Regulations of the Railway Act (RRA) 1889. Fines and costs paid following these convictions should be refunded.

Section 5(1) – fail to produce a ticket for inspection – is a summary only non-imprisonable offence under the RRA while section 5(3) covers offences in which someone does not pay their full fare or gives a railway company officer a false name or address. The offence under section 5(1), the judgment acknowledged, is not included within the definition of a railway offence.

HMCTS and the judge had been asked to review six test cases for the purposes of considering and deciding what the correct legal remedy is.

Continue reading @ Law Society Gazette.

Chief Magistrate Rules On ‘Unlawful’ Use Of The Single Justice Procedure

Law Society Gazette ✒ Written by Paul Rogerson 
and Charlie Molone. Recommended by Christy Walsh.

The MoJ has been accused of dragging its feet over implementing the Ouseley recommendations on closed material procedure. And its belated response has done little to pacify alienated special advocates.

It is doubly ironic that the government dropped its response to concerns about the UK’s controversial ‘secret justice’ system into a political vacuum. ‘Least said the better’ would seem to have been Whitehall’s default mode here. Remarkably (or perhaps not so remarkably), six years have elapsed since a statutory review was first scheduled to begin.

The Ministry of Justice published its verdict on the 2022 Ouseley report on closed material procedure (CMP) on 29 May, the day before parliament dissolved. This came after a group of 25 practising special advocates, including 16 KCs, told the attorney general in April that they would not accept any new appointments while current defects with the system remain unaddressed. Special advocates are the security-cleared lawyers appointed to represent the interests of those excluded from viewing material rated national security-sensitive.

Under the Justice and Security Act 2013, a review of the CMP was required to commence ‘as soon as practicable’ after June 2018. 

Continue reading @ Law Society Gazette.

In Depth ❥ ‘Secret Justice’ Response Dropped Into Political Vacuum

Law Society Gazette ✒ Written by Charlie Moloney. Recommended by Christy Walsh.

The government has finally responded to concerns about the UK’s controversial 'secret justice' system - nearly six years after a statutory review was first scheduled to begin.

A response from the Ministry of Justice to the 2022 Ouseley report on closed material procedure (CMP) was published yesterday, ahead of the dissolution of parliament. The response comes after a group of 25 practising special advocates (SAs), including 16 KCs, told the attorney general last month that they would not accept any new appointments while current defects with the system remain unaddressed.

One area of controversy is resourcing for special advocates, encompassing staffing levels and training. Special advocates are the security-cleared lawyers appointed to represent the interests of those excluded from viewing material rated national security-sensitive.

Under the Justice and Security Act 2013, a review of the CMP was required to commence ‘as soon as practicable’ after June 2018. The review was not commissioned until February 2021, under former High Court judge Sir Duncan Ouseley. The judge completed the review in December 2021 and made 20 recommendations.

The MoJ said this week it will be taking forward seven of Ouseley’s recommendations. On resourcing, the MoJ will work with the Special Advocates’ Support Office (SASO) to ‘understand what would be required, in terms of resourcing, to deliver an increased training offer to SAs, to ensure that regular training is available to both new and existing SAs.


‘We will continue to engage with GLD [Government Legal Department] and SASO to ensure that the system has sufficient resilience.’





MoJ says it will take forward seven of Ouseley’s recommendations

Source: Jonathan Goldberg

The government also pledged to create an accessible, searchable, closed judgment summaries database, and a secure electronic full closed judgments database. The response adds: ‘It is important to note, however, that this is not a straightforward task and will take some time to establish. There are a number of security considerations that will need to be taken in to account when dealing with material of such a sensitive nature.’

Experienced special advocate Angus McCullough KC, of 1 Crown Office Row, has been highly critical of the government’s inertia in a series of blogposts. McCullough has been instructed as the special advocate in some of the most high-profile cases of recent years, including Shamima Begum’s appeal against deprivation of British citizenship.


Explaining his decision not to accept new appointments, he wrote last October: 'The structural unfairness of that system is one thing, but it is quite another for that unfairness to be heightened by a failure to provide proper resourcing and support for special advocates. That aggravated unfairness of CMPs is a price paid by the excluded parties, even though they may be unaware of it. The system depends on special advocates being able to discharge our role effectively.'

Continue reading @ Law Society Gazette.

'Secret Justice' Review ✤ MoJ's Long-Delayed Response 'Profoundly Disappointing'

Law Society Gazette ✒ Written by Charlie Moloney. Recommended by Christy Walsh.

A High Court judge today rejected a student’s challenge to a ban on praying at her school, saying the right to freedom of religion does not confer an ‘absolute right’ to manifest religious beliefs.

The anonymous student had sued the Michaela Community Schools Trust over its policy of prohibiting its pupils from performing prayer rituals on its premises. But Mr Justice Linden ruled today that the prayer ritual policy (PRP) did not interfere with the claimant’s rights under Article 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

‘I recognise that this may appear to some to be a surprising conclusion’, the judge said, but added that ‘Article 9 protects “freedom” to manifest religious beliefs rather than conferring an absolute right to do so’.

The judge continued: 

The claimant at the very least impliedly accepted, when she enrolled at the school, that she would be subject to restrictions on her ability to manifest her religion. She knew that the school is secular and her own evidence is that her mother wished her to go there because it was known to be strict.

Continue reading @ Law Society Gazette.

No 'Absolute Right' To Manifest Religious Beliefs, Prayer-Ban Judge Rules

Law Society Gazette - Recommended by Christy Walsh. 
 Bianca Castro

For the first time, the views of alleged victims will be considered when deciding whether the civilian or military justice system should deal with criminal cases involving a member of the armed forces.

Prosecutors have been told to check with police that victims have been asked if they have any opinions on jurisdiction. Any preferences 'will be taken into consideration'.

Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and Service Prosecuting Authority (SPA) prosecutors in serious cases must consult over jurisdiction, regardless of whether an alleged victim has expressed a view. The final decision will be made by a CPS deputy chief crown prosecutor and a managing prosecutor or deputy director at the SPA.

The changes follow a consultation earlier this year, which attracted 13 responses.

Director of public prosecutions Max Hill KC said: ‘Being a victim of crime can have a devastating and life-long impact, so it is right that they have a voice in the criminal justice process. It is only through balancing the rights of victims and defendants that we can ensure justice is delivered.

Continue reading @ Law Society Gazette,

Victims Will Have Say In Jurisdiction Of Criminal Cases Involving Armed Forces

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)