| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful 11:06 - Feb 13 with 1855 views | Kievthegreat |
The proscribing of Palestine Action has been ruled "Unlawful" and the High Court have recommended it be quashed:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/liv
Commentary from Lawyer David Allen Green (it's a whole thread):
[Post edited 13 Feb 11:08]
|  | | |  |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 13:53 - Feb 13 with 608 views | chantryblueboy |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 13:48 - Feb 13 by DJR |
There has to be legislation (in this case secondary legislation) in place to ban a terrorist organisation, and that has to be passed by Parliament.
It is then up to people to challenge it in court if there are grounds to do so.
But the vast majority of legislation is never challengeable because it is not in the government's interest to bring forth challengeable legislation.
But secondary legislation does open up the scope for challenge more than Acts of Parliament. [Post edited 13 Feb 13:49]
|
Is secondary legislation the closest thing we have to a US executive order? I’ve never come across that term before
Cheers |  | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 13:56 - Feb 13 with 601 views | DJR |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 13:34 - Feb 13 by GlasgowBlue |
PA are only a little bit terrorist apparently.
But Judge Victoria Sharp, reading out a summary of the judgement in court, said only "a very small number" of Palestine Action's activities "amounted to acts of terrorism". |
And that was one of the key points of the judgment given the government's policy in relation to what was a very wide definition of terrorism.
Indeed, the policy was in force as a safeguard from when the Terrorism Act was passed.
This from the judgment.
"The Home Secretary has a long-standing policy in respect of the exercise of the power, first stated in Parliament when the 2000 Act was before it as a Bill"
I might add that if that was the policy expressed in Parliament to assuage concerns about the wideness of the definition of terrorism, I am not sure a court would look favourably on the government subsequently watering down that policy [Post edited 13 Feb 14:16]
|  | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 14:00 - Feb 13 with 581 views | itfcjoe |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 13:34 - Feb 13 by GlasgowBlue |
PA are only a little bit terrorist apparently.
But Judge Victoria Sharp, reading out a summary of the judgement in court, said only "a very small number" of Palestine Action's activities "amounted to acts of terrorism". |
How much terrorism do you have to do before you are a terrorist? Guess wait for them to attack a few military bases and seriously assault more police officers |  |
| |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 14:07 - Feb 13 with 547 views | Guthrum |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 13:42 - Feb 13 by chantryblueboy |
I more mean why does Parliament have to vote on it if the court is the one that ultimately decides anyway |
The court only makes the decision if somebody challenges it. It's an important right that the citizenry can question Parliament's decisions (or interpretation of the law).
The Commons had to vote in order to ratify the Home Secretary's decision. They could have not done so, but it occurred in the aftermath of the Brize Norton break in and criminal damage, with also the threat of withdrawal of the whip from Government MPs who voted against. Plus there were a couple of neo-nazi groups being banned in the same vote.
Most of the parties overwhelmingly supported it (the noes were 9 Labour, 6 LibDem, 4 Greens, 1 SDLP and 6 independents). |  |
| |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 14:11 - Feb 13 with 532 views | DJR |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 13:53 - Feb 13 by chantryblueboy |
Is secondary legislation the closest thing we have to a US executive order? I’ve never come across that term before
Cheers |
I have a feeling executive orders are only something the President can do.
Acts of Parliament, the top level of legislation, often include powers to make what is called secondary legislation, the level below. Secondary legislation can take the form of orders or regulations. Both are passed by the Houses of Parliament and have equal effect in law.
Here's the relevant provisions of section 3 of the Terrorism Act, and it will be under section 3(3) that the Home Secretary made the secondary legislation (ie. order) to add Palestine Action to the list in Schedule 2.
3 Proscription
{1) For the purposes of this Act an organisation is proscribed if—
(a) it is listed in Schedule 2, or
(b) it operates under the same name as an organisation listed in that Schedule.
(3) The Secretary of State may by order—
(a) add an organisation to Schedule 2;
(b) remove an organisation from that Schedule;
(c) amend that Schedule in some other way.
(4) The Secretary of State may exercise his power under subsection (3)(a) in respect of an organisation only if he believes that it is concerned in terrorism.
Terrorism is widely defined. [Post edited 13 Feb 14:18]
| | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 14:15 - Feb 13 with 509 views | Guthrum |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 13:53 - Feb 13 by chantryblueboy |
Is secondary legislation the closest thing we have to a US executive order? I’ve never come across that term before
Cheers |
Not really, because secondary legislation still has to be run through Parliament and can be blocked or amended in the process.
With US Presidential Executive Orders, that is usually not the case - altho the funding to pay for them may have to be voted by Congress. Which is why the stuff Trump's been doing has often diverted money from other, unusual sources to pay for his initiatives. They have also trawled up some old or rarely-used laws to justify the EOs, which cannot make fresh new laws, only dictate how existing ones are to be carried out (or not carried out any more, as with the environmental one yesterday). | |
| |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 16:16 - Feb 13 with 415 views | ZapatasMoustache |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 13:25 - Feb 13 by chantryblueboy |
Cheers
Why have the vote then? Why is it not a court decision to proscribe a group? |
They knew it would get squashed sooner or later but they wanted to frighten people out of a very effective action. |  | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 16:46 - Feb 13 with 370 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 16:16 - Feb 13 by ZapatasMoustache |
They knew it would get squashed sooner or later but they wanted to frighten people out of a very effective action. |
What particular action did you find effective? The breaking into an RAF base and damaging two military aircraft or breaking into a defense electronics company and breaking a female police officer's spine with a sledgehammer.
Was it effective enough to stop Netanyahu committing war crimes in Gaza. How many Palestinian lives did the PA's actions save? |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 17:07 - Feb 13 with 344 views | BlacknGoldnBlue |
The Government over reached with PA the same way they're overreaching by reclassificating all animal testing laboratorys and their suppliers as essential infrastructure...just to prevent animal rights protesters |  |
| |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 17:31 - Feb 13 with 306 views | MattinLondon |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 17:07 - Feb 13 by BlacknGoldnBlue |
The Government over reached with PA the same way they're overreaching by reclassificating all animal testing laboratorys and their suppliers as essential infrastructure...just to prevent animal rights protesters |
Let’s not get all misty eyed here - some animal rights groups were quite extreme. Targeting workers homes and threatening their families with violence.
The same with PA - some of their members are antisemitic and at their protests clearly chanted slogans which were awful. Praising Hamas first example which isn’t a very good look. |  | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 17:34 - Feb 13 with 295 views | BornDeleuze |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 11:24 - Feb 13 by BlueBadger |
The 'nobody should go to prison for hurty words' crowd were all for people going to prison for saying 'I really don't think supporting war crimes is very nice'. [Post edited 13 Feb 15:27]
|
War crimes? Like what happened on October 7th? |  | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 18:06 - Feb 13 with 258 views | mellowblue |
It was a hasty decision at the time that could not be justified legally. No real surprise there. Bit like banning naughty music singles back in the 70s/80s. All it does is give it publicity and attract support. So is counter-productive. | | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 18:21 - Feb 13 with 226 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 11:24 - Feb 13 by BlueBadger |
The 'nobody should go to prison for hurty words' crowd were all for people going to prison for saying 'I really don't think supporting war crimes is very nice'. [Post edited 13 Feb 15:27]
|
Don't be daft. Nobody is suggesting people are jailed for protesting about the State of Israel's war crimes in Gaza. There are pro Palestine protests taking place in most towns and cities across our country.
The people who were arrested were not arrested for protesting against war crimes. They were arrested for showing support for a prescribed terrorist organisation. Which did reveal the true colours of a minority who switched from supporting the Palestinian people to supporting Palestinian Action. It's as if the Palestinian people simply pawns in the whole debate. Similar tho some on here who are only ever interested in Palestinians of they are killed by Jews. Murdered by Hamas and you don't hear a peep. | |
| |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 18:23 - Feb 13 with 230 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 11:09 - Feb 13 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Good news (not justifying the actions on the military base) - and embarrassing for this authoritarian government. |
We dont have an authoritarian government.
I am inclined to agree they went too far on this one though. | |
| |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 18:26 - Feb 13 with 221 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 13:53 - Feb 13 by chantryblueboy |
Is secondary legislation the closest thing we have to a US executive order? I’ve never come across that term before
Cheers |
Not really. It is a pragmatic thing, to allow the day to day adjustments and specifics to be applied under the umbrella of full statutes. There are many many statutory instruments. Often setting out a particular set of guidleines, for instance, which may change from time to time. | |
| |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 18:27 - Feb 13 with 219 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 16:16 - Feb 13 by ZapatasMoustache |
They knew it would get squashed sooner or later but they wanted to frighten people out of a very effective action. |
quashed. | |
| |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 18:37 - Feb 13 with 194 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 13:48 - Feb 13 by DJR |
There has to be legislation (in this case secondary legislation) in place to ban a terrorist organisation, and that has to be passed by Parliament.
It is then up to people to challenge it in court if there are grounds to do so.
But the vast majority of legislation is never challengeable because it is not in the government's interest to bring forth challengeable legislation.
But secondary legislation does open up the scope for challenge more than Acts of Parliament. [Post edited 13 Feb 13:49]
|
Couple of key points that are often not appreciated by lay people:
1- Parliament is indeed sovereign. It could pass a law that says that the definition of terrorist organisation is in the absolute personal discretion of the prime minister and that any laws in conflict with that approach be removed from the statute book. The Courts would then almost certainly have refrained from interfering. Hopefully our democracy and parliament is strong enough that such things would never pass, for obvious reasons.
2- Judicial review does not mean a "review by judges". The courts cannot simply look at somethign and decide whether its okay or not. They don't have the last say on a law or decision generally. There are very strict parameters for judicial review which is the name for a particular court process designed to consider decisions of public bodies to check whether they have follwoed their own processes properly and whether the decision is in fact lawful, by reference to the relevant laws. JR is succesful only where a decision is illegal, procedurally flawed, or patently irrational. In this instance, the issue was that the Home secretary did not follow her own procedures and also that the decision was contrary to the human rights act. [Post edited 13 Feb 19:02]
| |
| |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 22:01 - Feb 13 with 126 views | ZapatasMoustache |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 18:27 - Feb 13 by redrickstuhaart |
quashed. |
Either works fine, I wasn’t being legalistic! | | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 22:02 - Feb 13 with 120 views | chantryblueboy |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 18:37 - Feb 13 by redrickstuhaart |
Couple of key points that are often not appreciated by lay people:
1- Parliament is indeed sovereign. It could pass a law that says that the definition of terrorist organisation is in the absolute personal discretion of the prime minister and that any laws in conflict with that approach be removed from the statute book. The Courts would then almost certainly have refrained from interfering. Hopefully our democracy and parliament is strong enough that such things would never pass, for obvious reasons.
2- Judicial review does not mean a "review by judges". The courts cannot simply look at somethign and decide whether its okay or not. They don't have the last say on a law or decision generally. There are very strict parameters for judicial review which is the name for a particular court process designed to consider decisions of public bodies to check whether they have follwoed their own processes properly and whether the decision is in fact lawful, by reference to the relevant laws. JR is succesful only where a decision is illegal, procedurally flawed, or patently irrational. In this instance, the issue was that the Home secretary did not follow her own procedures and also that the decision was contrary to the human rights act. [Post edited 13 Feb 19:02]
|
The first point was my understanding and where my confusion stemmed from. Thanks | | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 22:08 - Feb 13 with 115 views | ZapatasMoustache |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 16:46 - Feb 13 by GlasgowBlue |
What particular action did you find effective? The breaking into an RAF base and damaging two military aircraft or breaking into a defense electronics company and breaking a female police officer's spine with a sledgehammer.
Was it effective enough to stop Netanyahu committing war crimes in Gaza. How many Palestinian lives did the PA's actions save? |
Well since the second one didn’t happen I’ll go with the first, but in general I’m in favour of a) undermining covert British military flights directly supporting a genocide AND b) sabotaging weapons of mass destruction for use in a genocide | | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 22:20 - Feb 13 with 84 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 22:08 - Feb 13 by ZapatasMoustache |
Well since the second one didn’t happen I’ll go with the first, but in general I’m in favour of a) undermining covert British military flights directly supporting a genocide AND b) sabotaging weapons of mass destruction for use in a genocide |
"the second one didn’t happen"? | |
| |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 22:40 - Feb 13 with 65 views | ZapatasMoustache |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 22:20 - Feb 13 by GlasgowBlue |
"the second one didn’t happen"? |
I believe it’s sub judice so I’m not going to say what I think *did* happen but has what you claim been proven in court? | | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 22:43 - Feb 13 with 54 views | have_a_word_with_him |
Thanks you've just reminded me to press that "Football only" button so I can read only football related posts on a football website.
Out of interest isn't there a "those were the politics days" you could go and enjoy spending time posting on rather than doing so on one about Ipswich Town? |  | | |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 22:46 - Feb 13 with 48 views | StokieBlue |
| Palestine Action win Judicial Review. Proscribing Ruled Unlawful on 22:43 - Feb 13 by have_a_word_with_him |
Thanks you've just reminded me to press that "Football only" button so I can read only football related posts on a football website.
Out of interest isn't there a "those were the politics days" you could go and enjoy spending time posting on rather than doing so on one about Ipswich Town? |
You don't have to read it and thus you don't have to comment if you don't want to be in the debate.
This forum has never been solely about the football club and most members wouldn't want it to be.
SB [Post edited 13 Feb 22:47]
|  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
