DOCSLIB.ORG

Review of Judicial Appointments in Northern Ireland

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Review of Judicial Appointments in Northern Ireland Committee for Justice Review of Judicial Appointments in Northern Ireland Together with the Minutes of Proceedings of the Committee relating to the Report, Minutes of Evidence, Written Submissions, Northern Ireland Assembly Research and Information Service Papers and Other Papers Ordered by the Committee for Justice to be printed 26 April 2012 Report: NIA 38/11-15 (Committee for Justice) REPORT EMBARGOED UNTIL COMMENCEMENT OF THE DEBATE IN PLENARY Session 2011/15 First Report Membership and Powers Membership and Powers Powers The Committee for Justice is a Statutory Departmental Committee established in accordance with paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Belfast Agreement, Section 29 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 and under Standing Order 48. The Committee has the power to: ■ consider and advise on Departmental budgets and annual plans in the context of the overall budget allocation; ■ consider relevant secondary legislation and take the Committee stage of primary legislation; ■ call for persons and papers; ■ initiate inquires and make reports; and ■ consider and advise on any matters brought to the Committee by the Minister of Justice. Membership The Committee has eleven members including a Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson and a quorum of five members. The membership of the Committee during the current mandate has been as follows: Mr Paul Givan (Chairman) Mr Raymond McCartney (Deputy Chairman) Mr Sydney Anderson Mr Stewart Dickson Mr Tom Elliott1 Mr Séan Lynch Mr Alban Maginness Ms Jennifer McCann Mr Patsy McGlone2 Mr Peter Weir Mr Jim Wells 1 With effect from 23 April 2012 Mr Tom Elliott replaced Mr Basil McCrea. 2 With effect from 23 April 2012 Mr Patsy McGlone replaced Mr Colum Eastwood. i Review of Judicial Appointments in Northern Ireland ii Table of Contents Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 2 Summary of Evidence 4 Consideration of the Issues 15 Conclusion 18 Appendix 1 Minutes of Proceedings 21 Appendix 2 Minutes of Evidence 35 Appendix 3 Written submissions 73 Appendix 4 NI Assembly Research and Information Service Papers 115 Appendix 5 Other Papers 171 iii Review of Judicial Appointments in Northern Ireland iv Executive Summary Executive Summary ■ The Northern Ireland Act 2009 made amendments to the process of judicial appointments and removals as set out in the Judicature (Northern Ireland) Act 1978 and the Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2002 (as amended by the Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2004). ■ Section 29C of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, as amended by Schedule 6 of the Northern Ireland Act 2009 (the 2009 Act), states that Standing Orders shall require one of the committees established by virtue of section 29 or the committee established by virtue of section 29A of the 1998 Act to review the operation of the amendments made by Schedules 2 – 5 of the Northern Ireland Act 2009. ■ Initially the Assembly and Executive Review Committee was to undertake the review however following the devolution of policing and justice it was agreed that the responsibility for the review should pass to the Committee for Justice and Standing Orders were amended accordingly. ■ The requirement to report on the review by 30 April 2012 provided restricted time to complete the review and the Committee therefore agreed to undertake a targeted consultation with key stakeholders and to place information on the review on the committee webpage. ■ The Committee received eight written submissions and held three oral evidence sessions with the Attorney General for Northern Ireland, the Lord Chief Justice in his capacity as Chairman of the NI Judicial Appointments Commission (NIJAC) with other NIJAC representatives and a representative from the Office of the Lord Chief Justice, and the NI Judicial Appointments Ombudsman. ■ Due to the limited time available the Committee’s deliberations, which are set out in the section of the report covering consideration of the issues, were confined to a small number of issues including the appointment process for Appeal Judges, the composition of NIJAC, whether judicial appointments are reflective of the community in Northern Ireland and the role of elected representatives. Committee Conclusion and Recommendation ■ Having considered the evidence received and noting that the Department of Justice and NIJAC are of the view that the arrangements created by the 2009 Act, while only in place for a relatively short period of time, appear to be working satisfactorily, the Committee recommends that there should be no changes to the current process for judicial appointments and removals in Northern Ireland at this time. ■ Given the statutory requirement to report to the Assembly by 30 April 2012, which restricted the time available to complete this review, and the fact that a number of issues may merit further consideration, the Committee intends to undertake a further review of the Judicial Appointments and Removals processes. 1 Review of Judicial Appointments in Northern Ireland Introduction Background 1. The Northern Ireland Act 2009 made amendments to the process of judicial appointments and removals as set out in the Judicature (Northern Ireland) Act 1978 and the Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2002 (as amended by the Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2004). 2. Section 29C of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, as amended by Schedule 6 of the Northern Ireland Act 2009 (the 2009 Act), states that Standing Orders shall require one of the committees established by virtue of section 29 or the committee established by virtue of section 29A of the 1998 Act to review the operation of the amendments made by Schedules 2 – 5 of the Northern Ireland Act 2009. 3. Initially Standing Order 59 (4A) required that the Assembly and Executive Review Committee should undertake the review of the operation of the amendments made by Schedules 2 – 5 of the Northern Ireland Act 2009. Following the devolution of policing and justice and the establishment of the Committee for Justice discussion took place regarding which committee would be best placed to carry out the review. Agreement was reached that responsibility should pass to the Committee for Justice and the Chairman of the Assembly and Executive Review Committee subsequently wrote to the Committee on Procedures to request that Standing Orders be amended accordingly. A copy of the relevant correspondence is included at Appendix 5 in the report. 4. The Standing Orders of the Assembly were subsequently amended on 28 November 2011 and Standing Order 49 A states: “(1) The statutory committee established to advise and assist the Minister of Justice (in this Standing Order referred to as ‘the Committee for Justice’) shall – (a) review the operation of the amendments made by Schedules 2 to 5 to the Northern Ireland Act 2009; (b) report on its review by 30 April 2012; and (c) include in its report any recommendations it has for changes to the way in which judicial office holders are appointed and removed.” The Committee’s Approach 5. At its meeting on 2 February 2012 the Committee agreed the following terms of reference for the Review of Judicial Appointments: The Committee for Justice will: (a) review the operation of the amendments made by Schedules 2 to 5 to the Northern Ireland Act 2009; (b) identify any issues in the operation of these amendments; (c) if applicable, make recommendations for changes to the way in which judicial office holders are appointed and removed; and (d) report on the review by 30 April 2012. 6. Given the limited time available to complete the review the Committee agreed to undertake a targeted consultation with the following key stakeholders and to place information on the review on the committee webpage: 2 Introduction ■ The NI Judicial Appointments Commission ■ The NI Judicial Appointments Ombudsman ■ The Lord Chief Justice ■ The Attorney General for Northern Ireland ■ The Lord Chancellor ■ The First Minister and deputy First Minister ■ The Minister of Justice ■ The Assembly and Executive Review Committee ■ The Committee for the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister ■ The Political Parties represented in the Assembly ■ The two Independent Members in the Assembly ■ The Law Society of Northern Ireland ■ The Bar Council 7. The Committee received eight written submissions which are included at Appendix 3 in the report and held three oral evidence sessions with the Attorney General for Northern Ireland, the Lord Chief Justice in his capacity as Chairman of the NI Judicial Appointments Commission (NIJAC) with other NIJAC representatives and a representative from the Office of the Lord Chief Justice, and the NI Judicial Appointments Ombudsman. The Minutes of Evidence (Hansards) of the evidence sessions are included at Appendix 2 of this report. The Minutes of Proceedings relevant to this review are included at Appendix 1. 8. To assist the Committee’s consideration of the process of judicial appointments and removals in Northern Ireland a background paper setting out the amendments made by Schedules 2 – 5 of the Northern Ireland Act 2009 was prepared and is included in the report at Appendix 5. The Committee also commissioned research papers on the process of judicial appointments in Northern Ireland, the models of judicial appointment in America and Germany and the process of appointments to the Court of Appeal in England and Wales and how it differs from the process in Northern Ireland. The research papers are included in the report at Appendix 4. 9. While undertaking the review the Committee was cognisant of the on-going House of Lords Constitution Committee Inquiry into the judicial appointments process for the courts and tribunals of England and Wales and Northern Ireland and for the UK Supreme Court and that the Ministry of Justice had just completed a consultation on appointments and diversity relating to the judiciary in England and Wales. The House of Lords Constitution Committee published its Inquiry report on 28 March 2012 and the formal response to the Ministry of Justice consultation should be available in April 2012.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • United States Canada
    Comparative Table of the Supreme Courts of the United States and Canada United States Canada Foundations Model State judiciaries vs. independent and Unitary model (single hierarchy) where parallel federal judiciary provinces appoint the lowest court in the province and the federal government appoints judges to all higher courts “The judicial Power of the United “Parliament of Canada may … provide for the States, shall be vested in one Constitution, Maintenance, and Organization of Constitutional supreme Court” Constitution of the a General Court of Appeal for Canada” Authority United States, Art. III, s. 1 Constitution Act, 1867, ss. 101 mandatory: “the judicial Power of optional: “Parliament of Canada may … provide the United States, shall be vested in for … a General Court of Appeal for Canada” (CA Creation and one supreme Court” Art III. s. 1 1867, s. 101; first Supreme Court Act in 1875, Retention of the (inferior courts are discretionary) after debate; not constitutionally entrenched by Supreme Court quasi-constitutional convention constitutionally entrenched Previous higher appeals to the Judicial Committee of the Privy judicial Council were abolished in 1949 authority Enabling Judiciary Act Supreme Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-26 Legislation “all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising “a General Court of Appeal for Canada” confers under this Constitution” Art III, s. 2 plenary and ultimate authority “the Laws of the United States and Treaties made … under their Authority” Art III, s. 2 “Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls” (orig. jur.) Jurisdiction of Art III, s. 2 Supreme Court “all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction” Art III, s.
    [Show full text]
  • The Appointment, Tenure and Removal of Judges Under Commonwealth
    The The Appointment, Tenure and Removal of Judges under Commonwealth Principles Appoin An independent, impartial and competent judiciary is essential to the rule tmen of law. This study considers the legal frameworks used to achieve this and examines trends in the 53 member states of the Commonwealth. It asks: t, Te ! who should appoint judges and by what process? nur The Appointment, Tenure ! what should be the duration of judicial tenure and how should judges’ remuneration be determined? e and and Removal of Judges ! what grounds justify the removal of a judge and who should carry out the necessary investigation and inquiries? Re mo under Commonwealth The study notes the increasing use of independent judicial appointment va commissions; the preference for permanent rather than fixed-term judicial l of Principles appointments; the fuller articulation of procedural safeguards necessary Judge to inquiries into judicial misconduct; and many other developments with implications for strengthening the rule of law. s A Compendium and Analysis under These findings form the basis for recommendations on best practice in giving effect to the Commonwealth Latimer House Principles (2003), the leading of Best Practice Commonwealth statement on the responsibilities and interactions of the three Co mmon main branches of government. we This research was commissioned by the Commonwealth Secretariat, and undertaken and alth produced independently by the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law. The Centre is part of the British Institute of International and
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Ireland Policing Board Annual Report and Accounts Together with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General
    ANNUAL REPORT AND ACCOUNTS FOR THE PERIOD 1 APRIL 2008 - 31 MARCH 2009 CORPORATE VISION To secure for all the people of Northern Ireland an effective, efficient, impartial, representative and accountable police service which will secure the confidence of the whole community by reducing crime and the fear of crime. ANNUAL REPORT AND ACCOUNTS FOR THE PERIOD 1 APRIL 2008 - 31 MARCH 2009 Northern Ireland Policing Board Annual Report and Accounts together with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General. Presented to Parliament pursuant to Paragraph 7(3) b of Schedule 2 of the Police (NI) Act 2000. Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 15 July 2009. HC 674 London: The Stationery Office £26.60 © Crown Copyright 2009 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and other departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. For any other use of this material please write to Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU or e-mail: [email protected] ISBN 9780102948653 Contents Page 03 01 CHAIRMAN’S FOREWORD 04 02 CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S FOREWORD 09 03 MEMBERSHIP OF THE NORTHERN IRELAND POLICING BOARD 11 04 MANAGEMENT COMMENTARY 14 Background and principal
    [Show full text]
  • Mauritius's Constitution of 1968 with Amendments Through 2016
    PDF generated: 26 Aug 2021, 16:39 constituteproject.org Mauritius's Constitution of 1968 with Amendments through 2016 This complete constitution has been generated from excerpts of texts from the repository of the Comparative Constitutions Project, and distributed on constituteproject.org. constituteproject.org PDF generated: 26 Aug 2021, 16:39 Table of contents CHAPTER I: THE STATE AND THE CONSTITUTION . 7 1. The State . 7 2. Constitution is supreme law . 7 CHAPTER II: PROTECTION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS OF THE INDIVIDUAL . 7 3. Fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual . 7 4. Protection of right to life . 7 5. Protection of right to personal liberty . 8 6. Protection from slavery and forced labour . 10 7. Protection from inhuman treatment . 11 8. Protection from deprivation of property . 11 9. Protection for privacy of home and other property . 14 10. Provisions to secure protection of law . 15 11. Protection of freedom of conscience . 17 12. Protection of freedom of expression . 17 13. Protection of freedom of assembly and association . 18 14. Protection of freedom to establish schools . 18 15. Protection of freedom of movement . 19 16. Protection from discrimination . 20 17. Enforcement of protective provisions . 21 17A. Payment or retiring allowances to Members . 22 18. Derogations from fundamental rights and freedoms under emergency powers . 22 19. Interpretation and savings . 23 CHAPTER III: CITIZENSHIP . 25 20. Persons who became citizens on 12 March 1968 . 25 21. Persons entitled to be registered as citizens . 25 22. Persons born in Mauritius after 11 March 1968 . 26 23. Persons born outside Mauritius after 11 March 1968 .
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Act 1905
    Q UO N T FA R U T A F E BERMUDA SUPREME COURT ACT 1905 1905 : 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY 1 Interpretation CONSTITUTION OF THE SUPREME COURT 2 Union of existing Courts into Supreme Court 3 Prescription of number of Puisne Judges 4 Assistant Justices 5 Appointment of Judges of Supreme Court 6 Precedence of Judges 7 Powers of Judges to exercise jurisdiction 8 Powers of Acting Chief Justices 9 Powers etc. of Puisne Judge 10 Seal of Court 11 Place of sitting JURISDICTION AND LAW 12 Jurisdiction of Supreme Court 13 [repealed] 14 Jurisdiction in respect of persons suffering from mental disorder 15 Extent of application of English law 16 [repealed] 17 [repealed] 18 Concurrent administration of law and equity 19 Rules of law upon certain points 20 Proceedings in chambers 21 Provision as to criminal procedure 22 Savings for rules of evidence and law relating to jurors, etc. 1 SUPREME COURT ACT 1905 23 Restriction on institution of vexatious actions ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION 24 Admiralty jurisdiction of the Court 25 Mode of exercise of Admiralty jurisdiction 26 Jurisdiction in personam in collision and other similar cases 27 Wages 28 Supreme Court not to have jurisdiction in cases falling within Rhine Convention 29 Savings DISPOSAL OF MONEY PAID INTO COURT 30 Disposal of money paid into court 31 Payment into Consolidated Fund 32 Money paid into court prior to 1 July 1980 and still in court on that date 33 Notice of payment into court 34 Forfeiture of money 35 Rules relating to the payment of interest on money paid into court SITTINGS AND DISTRIBUTION OF BUSINESS OF THE COURT 36 Sittings of the Court 37 Session day 46 [] OFFICERS OF THE COURT 47 Duties of Provost Marshal General 48 Registrar and Assistant Registrar of the Court 49 Duties of Registrar 50 Taxing Master BARRISTERS AND ATTORNEYS 51 Admission of barristers and attorneys 52 Deposit of certificate of call etc.
    [Show full text]
  • A Democratic Design? the Political Style of the Northern Ireland Assembly
    A Democratic Design? The political style of the Northern Ireland Assembly Rick Wilford Robin Wilson May 2001 FOREWORD....................................................................................................3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................4 Background.........................................................................................................................................7 Representing the People.....................................................................................................................9 Table 1 Parties Elected to the Assembly ........................................................................................10 Public communication......................................................................................................................15 Table 2 Written and Oral Questions 7 February 2000-12 March 2001*........................................17 Assembly committees .......................................................................................................................20 Table 3 Statutory Committee Meetings..........................................................................................21 Table 4 Standing Committee Meetings ..........................................................................................22 Access to information.......................................................................................................................26 Table 5 Assembly Staffing
    [Show full text]
  • NILQ 62. FOREWORD.Qxd
    NILQ 63(4): 509–32 Modernising environmental regulation in Northern Ireland: a case study in devolved decision-making SharoN TurNer aNd CIara BreNNaN School of Law, Queen’s university Belfast * Introduction or over a decade, controversy about the quality of environmental regulation has cast a Fshadow over the effectiveness of environmental governance in Northern Ireland. Most fundamentally this debate has centred on a crisis of confidence about the quality of regulation and a consensus that effective reform depends on the externalisation of this responsibility from central government. Not surprisingly, the causes of weak regulation were rooted in the eclipsing impact of the Troubles and the fossilisation of government that occurred during the decades of Direct Rule.1 However, although the first steps towards meaningful reform were eventually taken under Direct Rule, the restoration of devolution and the stabilising power-sharing process has meant that the trajectory of regulatory reform has been largely shaped by a devolved administration. The purpose of this paper is to examine the nature and implications of that process. Pressure for regulatory reform is an issue that has confronted both configurations of Northern Ireland’s power-sharing Executive. Despite its brief and tumultuous lifespan, the first Ulster Unionist Party (UUP)/Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP)-led administration was immediately faced not only with the evidence of serious regulatory dysfunction but also the first stage of what became a concerted civil society campaign for independent regulation. The collapse of power-sharing did nothing to quell this pressure. Instead, when devolution was restored five years later the new Democratic Unionist/Sinn Fein-led administration was faced once again with pressure for regulatory reform.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lives of the Chief Justices of England
    This is a reproduction of a library book that was digitized by Google as part of an ongoing effort to preserve the information in books and make it universally accessible. https://books.google.com I . i /9& \ H -4 3 V THE LIVES OF THE CHIEF JUSTICES .OF ENGLAND. FROM THE NORMAN CONQUEST TILL THE DEATH OF LORD TENTERDEN. By JOHN LOKD CAMPBELL, LL.D., F.E.S.E., AUTHOR OF 'THE LIVES OF THE LORd CHANCELLORS OF ENGL AMd.' THIRD EDITION. IN FOUE VOLUMES.— Vol. IT;; ; , . : % > LONDON: JOHN MUEEAY, ALBEMAELE STEEET. 1874. The right of Translation is reserved. THE NEW YORK (PUBLIC LIBRARY 150146 A8TOB, LENOX AND TILBEN FOUNDATIONS. 1899. Uniform with the present Worh. LIVES OF THE LOED CHANCELLOKS, AND Keepers of the Great Seal of England, from the Earliest Times till the Reign of George the Fourth. By John Lord Campbell, LL.D. Fourth Edition. 10 vols. Crown 8vo. 6s each. " A work of sterling merit — one of very great labour, of richly diversified interest, and, we are satisfied, of lasting value and estimation. We doubt if there be half-a-dozen living men who could produce a Biographical Series' on such a scale, at all likely to command so much applause from the candid among the learned as well as from the curious of the laity." — Quarterly Beview. LONDON: PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, STAMFORD STREET AND CHARINg CROSS. CONTENTS OF THE FOURTH VOLUME. CHAPTER XL. CONCLUSION OF THE LIFE OF LOKd MANSFIELd. Lord Mansfield in retirement, 1. His opinion upon the introduction of jury trial in civil cases in Scotland, 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Forum À L'intention Des Juges Spécialisés En Propriété
    WIPO/IP/JU/GE/19/INF/1 ORIGINAL: FRANÇAIS / ENGLISH DATE: 13 NOVEMBRE / NOVEMBER 13, 2019 Forum à l’intention des juges spécialisés en propriété intellectuelle Genève, 13 – 15 novembre 2019 Intellectual Property Judges Forum Geneva, November 13 to 15, 2019 LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS LIST OF PARTICIPANTS établie par le Secrétariat prepared by the Secretariat WIPO FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY WIPO/IP/JU/GE/19/INF/1 page 2 I. PARTICIPANTS (par ordre alphabétique / in alphabetical order) ABDALLA Muataz (Mr.), Judge, Intellectual Property Court, Khartoum, Sudan ACKAAH-BOAFO Kweku Tawiah (Mr.), Justice, High Court of Justice, Accra, Ghana AJOKU Patricia (Ms.), Justice, Federal High Court, Ibadan, Nigeria AL BUSAIDI Khalil (Mr.), Judge, Court of First Instance; President, General Administration for Judges, Council of Administrative Affairs for the Judiciary, Muscat, Oman AL KAMALI Mohamed Mahmoud (Mr.), Director General, Institute of Training and Judicial Studies, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates ALABDULQADER Ahmed (Mr.), Appeal Judge, Commercial Court, Dammam, Saudi Arabia ALABUDI Ahmed (Mr.), Appeal Judge, Commercial Section, Appeal Court, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia ALARCON POLANCO Edynson Francisco (Sr.), Magistrado, Corte de Apelación del Distrito Nacional, Santo Domingo, República Dominicana ALEXANDROVA Iskra (Ms.), Judge, Third Department, Supreme Administrative Court, Sofia, Bulgaria ALHIDAR Ibrahim (Mr.), Judge, Commercial Court, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia ALJABRI Nayef (Mr.), Counselor, Court of Appeal, Kuwait City, Kuwait ALKHALAF Mahmoud (Mr.), Judge, Court
    [Show full text]
  • Lord Chief Justice Delegation of Statutory Functions
    Delegation of Statutory Functions – Issue No. 2 of 2015 Lord Chief Justice – Delegation of Statutory Functions Introduction The Lord Chief Justice has a number of statutory functions, the exercise of which may be delegated to a nominated judicial office holder (as defined by section 109(4) of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (the 2005 Act). This document sets out which judicial office holder has been nominated to exercise specific delegable statutory functions. Section 109(4) of the 2005 Act defines a judicial office holder as either a senior judge or holder of an office listed in schedule 14 to that Act. A senior judge, as defined by s109(5) of the 2005 Act refers to the following: the Master of the Rolls; President of the Queen's Bench Division; President of the Family Division; Chancellor of the High Court; Senior President of Tribunals; Lord or Lady Justice of Appeal; or a puisne judge of the High Court. Only the nominated judicial office holder to whom a function is delegated may exercise it. Exercise of the delegated functions cannot be sub- delegated. The nominated judicial office holder may however seek the advice and support of others in the exercise of the delegated functions. Where delegations are referred to as being delegated prospectively1, the delegation takes effect when the substantive statutory provision enters into force. The schedule, which is Issue 2 of 2015, is correct as at 17 December 2015.2 It contains new delegations, revocation of certain delegations to a number of judges and corrections to the delegations to the President of the Queen’s Bench Division and Chancellor of the High Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY)
    www.coe.int/cybercrime Strasbourg, 30 November 2020 T-CY (2020)33 Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY) T-CY 23 23rd Plenary of the T-CY Virtual meeting, 30 November 2020 Meeting report T-CY(2020)33 23rd Plenary/Meeting report 1 Introduction The 23rd Plenary of the T-CY Committee, meeting online on 30 November 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, was chaired by Cristina SCHULMAN (Romania) and opened by Jan KLEIJSSEN (Director of Information Society and Action against Crime, DG 1, Council of Europe). More than 130 representatives of 57 Parties, Observer and Ad-hoc Observer States, as well as of international organisations and Council of Europe committees participated. The regular plenary session was followed by a meeting of the T-CY Protocol Drafting Plenary from 1 to 3 December 2020. 2 Decisions The T-CY decided: Agenda item 1: Opening of the meeting and adoption of the agenda . To adopt the agenda; Agenda item 2: Bureau elections . To thank the outgoing Bureau for its contribution to the work of the T-CY; . To elect Cristina SCHULMAN (Romania) as Chair and Pedro VERDELHO (Portugal) as Vice- chair of the T-CY. To elect as Bureau members: - Albert ANTWI-BOASIAKO (Ghana); - Miriam BAHAMONDE BLANCO (Spain); - Camila BOSCH CARTAGENA (Chile); - Vanessa EL KHOURY-MOAL (France); - Benjamin FITZPATRICK (USA); - Justin MILLAR (United Kingdom); - Gareth SANSOM (Canada); - Nathan WHITEMAN (Australia). Agenda item 3: Terms of Reference for the preparation of the 2nd Additional Protocol . To extend the Terms of reference for the negotiations to May 2021 to permit finalisation of the draft Protocol.
    [Show full text]
  • 4Th IAP NORTH AMERICAN and CARIBBEAN REGIONAL CONFERENCE Montego Bay, Jamaica W.I
    4th IAP NORTH AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN REGIONAL CONFERENCE Montego Bay, Jamaica W.I. 2 – 4 November 2016 “Prosecution and Governance in the 21st Century – Current and Future Challenges to Tackling Cybercrime and Organized Financial Crimes” Wednesday, 2 November 2016 15:00 – 18:00 Registration for 4th IAP North American and Caribbean Regional Conference at the Hilton Rose Hall Resort and Spa 19:00 – 21:00 Welcome Reception – Hilton Rose Hall Resort & Spa Thursday, 3 November 2016 08:00 – 09:00 Registration at the Montego Bay Convention Centre - Rose Hall Shuttles will be provided daily from the Hilton Hotel to the Convention Centre; Dress Code: Business Casual) 09:00 – 10:00 Opening Ceremony Greetings: The Honorable Mrs. Justice Zaila McCalla, OJ - Chief Justice of Jamaica The Honorable Mr. Delroy Chuck, QC, MP - Minister of Justice Ms. Paula V. Llewellyn, CD, QC - Director of Public Prosecutions CULTURAL ITEM – 10 minutes Mr. Han Moraal - Acting Secretary-General of IAP Ms. Sirah Abraham - Criminal Justice Adviser to Barbados and Eastern Caribbean Professor Trevor Munroe - Executive Director of National Integrity Action Mr. Luis G. Moreno - US Ambassador to Jamaica TBC 10:00 – 10:10 The role of the International Association of Prosecutors (IAP) Dr. Rasmus H. Wandall - General Counsel of IAP 10:10 – 11:45 Plenary 1: “Cybercrime in a Changing Landscape: Implications for the Next Generation” Chair: Professor Hopeton Dunn - Jamaica Director -Caribbean Institute of Media and Communication, University of the West Indies, Mona Campus Speakers:
    [Show full text]