Some of you [inc. There are those pro-Assange, those against and then those quite concerned about lack of due process and even fair process, irrespective of their feelings on Assange. She explained this by stating that the public could normally observe from within the courtroom, where she could control their behaviour. The defence had called numerous witnesses, and each had lodged a written statement.
The prosecution and Baraitser both suggested that, having given their evidence in writing, there was no need for defence witnesses to give that evidence orally in open court. It would be much quicker to go straight to cross-examination by the prosecution.
For the defence, Edward Fitzgerald QC countered that justice should be seen to be done by the public. The public should be able to hear the defence evidence before hearing the cross-examination. It would also enable Julian Assange to hear the evidence summarised, which was important for him to follow the case given his lack of extended access to legal papers while in Belmarsh prison.
Baraitser stated there could not be any need for evidence submitted to her in writing to be repeated orally. Reading the rest of the two articles is quite worrying. I did state last evening that posts would start late morning but events have been pushed back out there later in the day, so this is going up now. The Donald needs him. What race is Mr. Who in the US wants Assange back? POTUS goes along with them too much at times, e. Shall look.As per law, rights are considered as the reasonable claim of the individuals which are accepted by the society and approved by statute.
It can be fundamental rights or human rights. The rights which are fundamental to the life of the citizens of a country are known as fundamental rights. On the other hand, human rights imply the rights that belong to all the human beings irrespective of their nationality, race, caste, creed, gender, etc. The main difference between fundamental rights and human rights is that the fundamental rights are specific to a particular country, whereas human rights has world wide acceptance.
Take a read of this article to get some more differences on these two. Basis for Comparison Fundamental Rights Human Rights Meaning Fundamental Rights means the primary rights of the citizens which are justifiable and written in the constitution. Human Rights are the basic rights that all the human beings can enjoy, no matter where they live, what they do, and how they behave, etc.
It is universal. Basic Principle Right of freedom Right of life with dignity Guarantee Constitutionally guaranteed Internationally guaranteed Enforcement Enforceable by the court of law. Enforceable by United Nation Organization. Origin Originated from the views of democratic society. Originated from the ideas of civilized nations. Fundamental Rights as the name suggests, are the basic rights of the citizens of a country that are approved by the Supreme court and recognized by the society.
Fundamental Rights applies to the all the people equally, regardless of their caste, religion, gender, race, origin, etc.
It ensure civil liberty, so that all the citizens of the country can lead their life in the way they want.
Human Rights are universal, absolute and fundamental moral claims, in the sense that they belong to all human beings, they are inalienable and are basic to a real living.
These are essential for all the individuals, irrespective of their caste, creed, nationality, place of birth, citizenship and any other status. All individuals enjoy same human rights, without any discrimination. Human Rights are basic rights of the people that advocate fairness, equality, freedom and respect for all. These are extremely important for the betterment of the society, as it abolishes various practices like injustice, exploitation, discrimination and inequality.
Human Rights Act versus a British Bill of Rights
Some of the common human rights are, freedom from discrimination, right to life, equality before the law, liberty and personal security, right to education, freedom of thought, right to free movement, etc. Fundamental Rights and Human Rights are vital for the existence and development of individuals.Here's a guide:. This international treaty - which the UK signed up to after World War Two - created basic rights and freedoms which every citizen in Europe is entitled to. The Human Rights Act includes the rights to life, liberty and security, a fair trial, respect for private life, and freedom of expression.
Critics say the Human Rights Act has led to "perverse" judgements, including a ruling that found the UK's blanket ban on prisoners voting was unlawful. A ruling that the radical Islamist cleric Abu Qatada shouldn't be deported to Jordan to face trial on terrorism charges, also caused outrage. Supporters stress that the original European convention on human rights was written by British lawyers after World War Two.
They argue that many human rights cases have involved victims challenging governments for gross failures to protect them. They say if the UK scraps the Human Rights Act then it will lose legitimacy and effectiveness in speaking out against human rights abuses elsewhere. Judgements supporters cite as important include a ruling that the UK was violating an individual's right to privacy by holding fingerprint and DNA information of people who hadn't been charged or convicted of a crime.
The ECHR said retaining the information "could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society". Supporters also point to a ruling that the UK had violated the human rights of several homosexual soldiers who had been dismissed from the armed forces because of their sexuality.
This case led to the law on the sexuality of those who can serve in the UK's armed forces being changed. The Tories say they want a Bill of Rights specifically designed to fit British needs and traditions. They say the Bill would allow the ECHR to apply a "margin of appreciation" - more discretion - in its rulings, so judges would be more likely to take into account British culture and history. The changes would have to tie into whatever the government decides to do about devolution to Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales.
Why is there a Human Rights Act? What's in it? Torture, slavery and discrimination are all banned as well.
Human Rights versus human rights
Why's it controversial? Ministers have fought an ongoing battle to avoid implementing the judgement. David Cameron says the idea of prisoners voting makes him feel physically sick. The ECHR said some of the evidence used against him may have come from torture. After years of legal battles, Qatada was eventually deported. What do supporters of the Human Rights Act say? How would a British Bill of Rights work?
Opponents say the plans could dilute human rights laws. If it happens, will it affect the whole of the UK? Human rights reform is immensely complicated. Related Topics.As it was at the beginning of this post, methinks it might have been crucial to the argument. It does not help the case in any way to pursue the vilification of John Hirst as the Mail did and as Andrew Neil attempted to do, as a substitute for argument.
Those sorts of things are counterproductive and prevent proper analysis. There are not many who do know the legal situation — so many pundits have put their views but these are contradicted elsewhere. Within the narrow terms of the ECHR, he is technically correct. First off, John takes me to task for not supporting human rights. The fact that I very much do support human rights is the reason I oppose Human Rights — the capitalized form being a Social Justice construct and therefore to be opposed with all at our disposal.
The Social Justice charade is found globally and so an article from the other side of the pond is just as relevant here:.
For this reason, social justice is arbitrary and irrational in essence, no matter how it is rationalized. Social justice ideas are in continual flux and are unsteady as a foundation for law. Social justice ideas emerge subjectively in elite liberal groups in a manner similar to how pagan myths emerge from the shamans of primitive tribes. The intellect of the shaman is quieted during mystical reveries as deep feelings and magical thinking well up from his subconscious realm.
Freedom is unknown to primitive tribes, due to the arbitrary government of witch doctors who rule through fear and arbitrary taboos. In like manner, the rule of the liberal elites would subject us all to arbitrary, irrational, politically correct codes of speech, thought, and behavior.
Like the shamans, liberals attempt to enforce their taboos through intimidation. The rule of shamans requires tribal group-think. This is why the ultimate triumph of social justice theory must signal the end of personal freedom. A second fatal weakness of social justice theory is that social justice is always politicized in its practical applications. Social justice theory sanctions the re-engineering of society according to the arbitrary preferences of those with power. Since social justice is arbitrary in definition and application and no two theorists can agree upon how to measure social injustice, those with political power can hire the social justice theorists who best suit their biases and preferences.Here is what he has to say about human rights and civil rights: The July edition of the Braille Monitor published a speech by Mary Ellen Gabias to the Canadian Federation of the Blind.
She analyzed how the growth of corporate charity has influenced the lives of blind people. Placing her concerns in a larger context, we will analyze a current economic debate concerning the failure of top-down efforts to reduce poverty. Beginning with the Rockefeller Foundation and gaining momentum with the World Bank and International Monetary Fund programs, the dominant approach is to use experts and their professional planning knowledge to provide programs for reducing poverty in the poorest countries.
This approach almost always involves using government leaders who are often dictators or despots, and entrenched bureaucracies are used to implement the programs. In many cases, instead of reducing poverty, governments become worse and ordinary people suffer.
Imposing solutions from the top down and using experts with outside funding frequently does not work. The ideas undergirding an opposing view other than a top-down approach go back to with Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson.
That all men are created equal and that individuals pursuing their own interests produce the best outcomes have propelled many of the advances in democratic government. The debate revolves around individual rights versus corporate power. What are major ingredients in the concept of human rights? Society is made up of individual humans, and the basic values that underlie their humanity should inform any collective effort to improve life chances.
In the United Nations established thirty articles defining and promoting human rights. Human rights are not legislated rights; they are inherent in the person of each individual human.
In this sense it is possible to see human rights as the basic value around which social arrangements can be built and society studied empirically. At the level of the individual and at the level of interacting with others, what does it mean to say that we have human rights?
How is a person being treated when that individual feels that her or his human rights are being violated? Ronald Dworkin, a well-known jurist and philosopher, has made major contributions to the clarification of the concept of human rights. He notes that there are ways of treating people that are inconsistent with recognizing them as full members of the human community. Weaker members of a political community are entitled to the same concern and respect from their government as more powerful members.
No one likes to be disrespected. All should be treated as having the capacity for intelligent self-determination. Unfortunately human rights provided in government charters and the writings of scholars are not always implemented in a society. The struggle for human rights is mediated by the legal processes resulting in civil laws.
Laws are frequently embedded in the power interests and work settings of experts who are self-regulated. The resulting top-down management minimizes input from consumers. Organizations are more likely to be changed by an open source model in which consumer ideas are a welcome input.
When the civil rights process fails, the only recourse may be civil protests and civil disobedience. The legal process is dominated by those with economic and political power.
The history of the NFB is in large part the struggle of blind people for self-determination. We have had to oppose many state and federal laws as well as policies which have impeded our human rights. Happily, more policymakers and lawmakers are being influenced by the humanizing philosophy of the National Federation of the Blind. References Dworkin, Ronald. Taking Rights Seriously. Basic Books Walter, G.
Search - Optional. Leave this field blank - Optional.Congratulations Prime Minister and your experts, you have caused the first evacuation of London since So BorisJohnson said there would be no further lockdowns without a Parliamentary vote. Tier 4 is a lockdown. Yet no vote. This not a democracy anymore.
The announcement that the First Minister is taking the whole of mainland Scotland into Tier 4 needs to be backed by evidence and should have been brought to an emergency session of Parliament. We are not a dictatorship and this action will have far reaching consequences. When assembling SAGE to give scientific advice to the government during Covid, who decided, right from the start, that a Communist and expert in psychological manipulation was an essential element of the committee?
What am I doing? However, at any moment, I can be out on my ear in real, on the street terms here — things are happening domestically and some neighbours have already succumbed — helps to have family around to go to. Not moaning about my own situation which is at least ok for now this Sunday. On the surface, it seems beyond the pale for this pundit to sheet this tragedy home to ideology but one look at Carrie Johncock and it is clearly down to that.
One look at which states are doing it in the States, one look at the shoddy Big Science running this thing and the utter lack of compassion for those below on the end of it, not least those losing their businesses and therefore, hundreds of others in each case losing their jobs. Put everyone on the state teat, destroy the middle class as such, small business, self employed.
Ah yes, Christmas. Burn the churches, prevent anyone congregating for whatever reason.
An occasional commenter at nourishing obscurity, Mark Matis, who has consistently said for a long time that as long as people moan and comply, absolutely nothing will be done.
The only true response needs to be to take a few of these politicians out. I say nothing either way on that solution but I will say this — taking out the visible pollies, the clown class, does little — new ones arise.
Still wondering why this particular carol caused such aggravation for two years and why readers were getting into consonants and the like — call me a thicko. I am especially looking forward to hearing it next year with consonants! Cherie wrote :. These arrangement were published in a series of books, Carols for Choirs. The first book was edited by Willcocks and Reginald Jacques. Before the second book was published Jacques passed away and John Rutter was invited to be co-editor.
Wrong message entirely. Global lefty.But, Dallas simply has to win this game and Dak Prescott badly needs to play a game he can finally feel good about in a rough spot.
I think he bounces back and makes some throws that we haven't seen in a month. Cowboys, 24-20Brandon GeorgeSure, the Giants will get a little surge from the return of Eli Manning as the starting quarterback and the coaching change. Cowboys, 27- 20Kate HairopoulosThe playoff scenarios already look dismal, but the recent win over Washington offered a peek of hope with a month of games to play. Cowboys, 24- 17 Barry HornThe Cowboys would appear to be slam-dunk winners against the hapless Giants.
Cowboys, 27-26Jon MachotaI expect Eli Manning's return to the starting lineup to bring an emotional lift to the Giants, allowing them to build an early lead. Cowboys, 21-17David MooreThe Giants have a new head coach.
Cowboys, 23-16Kevin SherringtonEli Manning makes his not-so-triumphant return just as the Cowboys figure out who they are. Cowboys, 21-17Bob SturmThe Giants could absolutely show up in any condition on Sunday and it should not surprise us with the chaos surrounding their franchise.
With 10 minutes left before the end of the game and with City leading 1-0, Tinkler introduced Thabo Mnyamane for Reneilwe Letsholonyane and within seconds on the park, Mnyamane grabbed the equaliser for SuperSport. Matsatsantsa then went on to win 4-2 on penalties. SuperSport have only suffered one loss in all competitions at home this season, with that loss coming from neighbours Sundowns in August last year.
Matsatsantsa have since went on an eight-match unbeaten run in all competitions at home after that loss. City got off to a bright start to life under McCarthy, reaching the MTN8 final but they have won only one of their last six league games, with their dramatic second half collapse at home to Maritzburg United in midweek particularly concerning. City will need to bring far more defensive resolve to Tshwane on Saturday, as they seek redemption for the MTN8 final defeat to SuperSport on October 14.
City have only won two away games in the league this season, at Wits in the first round of fixtures, and at Ajax, though that was effectively on their home ground at Cape Town Stadium. But I just fancy them to add a third today.
Matsatsantsa are on a good run under Eric Tinkler, unbeaten in seven league games, but I think that will come to an end, with City winning 2-1. Follow the game live HERE. Would you like to place a soccer bet. Click here to get started in 3 easy steps. Why SuperSport will win (Khaya Ndubane, Online Content Manager) Coach Eric Tinkler has already tasted victory against his former team City albeit through a penalty shootout in the final of the MTN8 in October.
Prediction: SuperSport United 1 Cape Town City 2 Follow the game live HERE. Man UnitedMan CityDraw googletag.