DOCSLIB.ORG

SPECIAL PROCEDURES Bulletin Highlights

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SPECIAL PROCEDURES Bulletin Highlights SPECIAL PROCEDURES BULLETIN NINTH ISSUE: APRIL - JUNE 2008 IN THIS ISSUE: Highlights ......................................., 8 HIGHLIGhts Communications ................................2 Country Visits .....................................2 Annual Meeting of Special Procedures Other activities ...................................6 Mandate Holders from 23 to 27 June Forthcoming Visits .............................7 Special Procedures mandate holders met in Geneva from 23 to 27 June 2008 for their An- Requested and Accepted Visits ........7 nual Meeting. Participants discussed various Positive Developments ......................7 issues related to working methods, including Press releases ....................................2 follow up to their activities, the relationship Mandate holders participate in An- with the Council, particularly in the context nual Meeting The quarterly Special Procedures Bul- of the Universal Periodic Review, cooperation letin provides a general overview of with regional human rights mechanisms, cooperation with the UN system, the main activities of the 38 Special and working with non-governmental organizations. They emphasized good Procedures mandates. The next issue practices in these areas and strategized about ways to address urgent hu- of the Bulletin will cover July-Septem- man rights situations. They also reiterated the importance of mainstream- ber 2008. The Bulletin is produced by ing gender perspectives into their work. Mandate holders met with the the Information, Coordination and Chairpersons of treaty bodies and emphasized the need to enhance the ex- Management Team of the Special Pro- isting level of mutual cooperation and coordination. Participants were also cedures Division of the OHCHR. briefed on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol, follow up to the Secretary-General’s study on violence (continued on page 8) How to send information on How to find information on Special alleged human rights violations Procedures to Special Procedures The OHCHR website (http://www.ohchr.org) contains infor- SPECIAL PROCEDURES DIVISION mation on the system of special procedures and on specific mandates under Human Rights Bodies/ Special Procedures, c/o OHCHR-UNOG with pages devoted to each Special Procedure and to the Coor- 8-4 Avenue de la Paix dination Committee. The pages contain details on the mandate, 2 Geneva 0 country visits, links to reports, press statements, how to submit Switzerland information, etc. Fax : +4 22 97 90 06 To learn more about Special Procedures, consult Fact Sheet no. E-mail : [email protected] 27 (Seventeen Frequently Asked Questions about United Nations http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/chr/ Special Rapporteurs) available at: http://www2.ohchr.org/eng- special/index.htm lish/about/publications/factsheet27.pdf (to be updated) For further information on how to submit commu- Or contact: nications, please visit the OHCHR website under Human Rights Bodies/ Special Procedures. Commu- nications should contain a factual description of the PUBLICATIONS UNIT alleged violation and be submitted by individuals or c/o OHCHR-UNOG Tel: +4 22 97 92 24 organizations acting in good faith with direct or reli- 8-4 Avenue de la Paix Fax: +4 22 97 90 0 able knowledge of the violations they are reporting. 2 Geneva 0 E-mail: [email protected] They should not be politically motived, abusive or Switzerland based solely on media reports. Please specify which special procedure(s) mechanism the information is For further information, or to submit information (other than addressed to in the subject line of the e-mail or fax, or specific information on alleged human rights violations), on the envelope. please contact: [email protected] page SPECIAL Procedures BULLETIN - NINTH ISSUE | April - June 2008 COMMUNicatioNS Some special procedures mechanisms intervene direct- established by him or her, as well as the criteria laid out ly with Governments on specific allegations of human in the Code of Conduct. Criteria generally relate to the rights violations that fall within their mandates. The in- reliability of the source and the credibility of informa- tervention can relate to a human rights violation that has tion; the details provided; and the scope of the mandate already occurred, is ongoing, or which has a high risk itself. Further information is frequently requested from of occurring. The process generally involves sending a sources. Communications should not be politically mo- letter to the concerned Government requesting informa- tivated, abusive or based solely on media reports. Man- tion and comments on the allegation and calling for pre- date holders may send joint communications when the ventive or investigative action. case falls within the scope of more than one mandate. The OHCHR’s Special Procedures Division Quick Re- The decision to intervene is at the discretion of the spe- sponse Desk coordinates communications and keeps cial procedure mandate holder and depends on criteria relevant databases updated. 2007 COMMUNICATIONS APRIL to JUNE 2008 1003 Total number of communications 281 Total number of communications 49% Joint Communications 57% Joint Communications 2294 Individual cases covered; 3% of these were 1629 Individual cases covered; 9% of these were wom- women en 128 Countries received communications 35 Countries received communications COUNTRY Visits ual broadening of the notion of terrorism. He warned COUNTER-TERRORISM AND HUMAN against broad and vague definitions that ultimately undermine the strong moral message inherent in strict RIGHTS definitions based on the inexcusable nature of every SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR VISITS SPAIN single act of terrorism. He also referred to Spain’s in- volvement in interrogations at Guantanamo Bay, as The Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protec- well as in the CIA programme of extraordinary rendi- tion of human rights and fundamental freedoms while tions. countering terrorism, Mr. Martin Scheinin, visited Spain from 7 to 4 May 2008. In the press statement The Special Rapporteur welcomed Spain’s prioriti- issued on 4 May, he particularly addressed the defini- zation of the prohibition against torture and ill-treat- tion of terrorist crimes, the prohibition of torture and ill ment in the context of counter-terrorism. However, he treatment of terrorist suspects, and the right to review expressed concern that allegations of torture or other by a higher court. The Special Rapporteur acknowl- forms of ill-treatment continue to be made by terrorism edged Spain’s history, including the events of Franco dictatorship, the activities of the Grupos Antiterroristas OHCHR WEBSITE PAGE ON de Liberación (GAL), and, most recently, the actions of Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA). He reiterated that acts SPECIAL PROCEDURES COUNTRY of terrorism, including those by ETA, amount to the de- VISITS struction of human rights. He also referred to Spain’s efforts to combat terrorism at both the national and http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/chr/special/ international levels. He identified Spain’s active role visits.htm at the international level as a best practice and called Links to alphabetical tables of country visits by Special upon Spain to maintain that role, including through Procedures mandate holders since 998 are available at initiatives for further improvements of the UN terrorist this link as well as a list of all countries having extend- listing and delisting procedures to bring them in line ed standing invitations to all the thematic procedures. with human rights and due process. He also recalled As of June 2008, 6 countries have extended standing that all efforts to combat terrorism must be within the invitations. framework of the law, including human rights law. An annual compilation of recommendations of Special The Special Rapporteur highlighted his concern that Procedures by country is also available on the Special certain aspects of the Penal Code may allow for a grad- Procedures webpage. page 2 SPECIAL Procedures BULLETIN - NINTH ISSUE | April - June 2008 suspects and do not systematically result in rapid and Rapporteur emphasized concerns that amendments thorough independent investigations. In this context, to the law governing the activities of defense lawyers he called for the complete eradication of the institution might threaten their independence. He also expressed of incommunicado detention. his concern about the tendency to identify defense law- yers with the interests, opinions and activities of their With regard to the right to review by a higher court, clients, and about practical obstacles for lawyers to be- the Special Rapportuer noted that terrorism cases are come judges. heard exclusively by a single court in Spain. He called on the Spanish Government to consider the possibil- Among his preliminary recommendations, the Special ity of including terrorism crimes in the jurisdiction of Rapporteur especially suggested that the Government ordinary courts, instead of a single central specialized ensure transparency of legal proceedings, implementa- court (Audiencia Nacional). The Special Rapporteur tion of judicial decisions, and full support to the new observed that transferring jurisdiction for terrorism working group on judicial reform. He also recom- crimes to ordinary courts with territorial jurisdiction mended that the Government adopt the draft law on a would enhance the legitimacy of Spain’s fight against juvenile justice system, analyse the results of the reform terrorism and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bill Digest: Thirty-Seventh Amendment of the Constitution
    Bill Digest | Thirty-seventh Amendment of the Constitution-Blasphemy Bill 2018 1 Bill Digest Thirty-seventh Amendment of the Constitution (Repeal of offence of publication or utterance of blasphemous matter) Bill 2018 Bill No. 87 of 2018 Roni Buckley, Parliamentary Researcher (Law) Monday, 23 July 2018 Abstract The Thirty-seventh Amendment of the Constitution (Repeal of the offence of publication or utterance of blasphemous matter) Bill 2018 proposes the removal of the offence of blasphemy from the Constitution by way of referendum. Under the current framework the Constitution provides that the offence of blasphemy is punishable according to law. The Defamation Act 2009 defines the offence and provides that a person shall be liable upon conviction on indictment for a maximum fine of €25,000. This Digest sets out recent events and controversies relating to blasphemy; assesses its historical and legislative development as well as relevant case-law. Finally, the Digest provides a comparative analysis with European and international countries. Oireachtas Library & Research Service | Bill Digest 2 Contents Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Proposed Amendment ................................................................................................................. 4 Definition of Blasphemy ............................................................................................................... 4 Reviews of the offence
    [Show full text]
  • After Serrano Ethics, Theology and the Law of Blasphemy
    Law Text Culture Volume 5 Issue 1 Law & The Sacred Article 3 January 2000 After Serrano Ethics, Theology and the Law of Blasphemy M. Casey Catholic Diocese, Melbourne A. Fischer H. Ramsay Catholic Diocese, Melbourne Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/ltc Recommended Citation Casey, M.; Fischer, A.; and Ramsay, H., After Serrano Ethics, Theology and the Law of Blasphemy, Law Text Culture, 5, 2000. Available at:https://ro.uow.edu.au/ltc/vol5/iss1/3 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] After Serrano Ethics, Theology and the Law of Blasphemy Abstract In the latest academic apologia for the antics of bad boy photographer Andres Serrano, Damien Casey attempts to portray him as not only a great liberal artist, but as a great Christian theologian too. One suspects Serrano is laughing up his sleeve at the ease with which such 'postmodern' thinking can be grafted on to the support of his iconoclasm. Casey rehearses some of the standard liberal excuses -- though with no fresh argument -- and then settles down to some more novel points concerning theology, Scripture and society. We will give some treatment of his standard liberal case first, then turn ot Casey's more original contributions, and finally comment on the current state of the law regarding this issue. This journal article is available in Law Text Culture: https://ro.uow.edu.au/ltc/vol5/iss1/3 Law & The Sacred: After Serrano Ethics, Theology and the Law of Blasphemy Michael Casey, Anthony Fisher OP & Hayden Ramsay In the latest academic apologia for the antics of bad boy photographer Andres Serrano, Damien Casey attempts to portray him as not only a great liberal artist, but as a great Christian theologian too.
    [Show full text]
  • Crimes Act 1961
    Reprint as at 1 October 2012 Crimes Act 1961 Public Act 1961 No 43 Date of assent 1 November 1961 Commencement see section 1(2) Contents Page Title 23 1 Short Title, commencement, etc 23 2 Interpretation 24 3 Meaning of convicted on indictment 31 4 Meaning of ordinarily resident in New Zealand 31 Part 1 Jurisdiction 5 Application of Act 31 6 Persons not to be tried in respect of things done outside 32 New Zealand 7 Place of commission of offence 32 7A Extraterritorial jurisdiction in respect of certain offences 32 with transnational aspects 7B Attorney-General’s consent required where jurisdiction 34 claimed under section 7A 8 Jurisdiction in respect of crimes on ships or aircraft 35 beyond New Zealand Note Changes authorised by section 17C of the Acts and Regulations Publication Act 1989 have been made in this reprint. A general outline of these changes is set out in the notes at the end of this reprint, together with other explanatory material about this reprint. This Act is administered by the Ministry of Justice. 1 Reprinted as at Crimes Act 1961 1 October 2012 8A Jurisdiction in respect of certain persons with diplomatic 37 or consular immunity 9 Offences not to be punishable except under New Zealand 39 Acts 10 Offence under more than 1 enactment 39 10A Criminal enactments not to have retrospective effect 40 10B Period of limitation 40 11 Construction of other Acts 41 12 Summary jurisdiction 41 Part 2 Punishments 13 Powers of courts under other Acts not affected 41 Death [Repealed] 14 Form of sentence in capital cases [Repealed]
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Blasphemy Law in Context: Press, Legislative, and Public Reactions Jeremy Patrick
    Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law Volume 16 | Issue 1 Article 9 2010 Canadian Blasphemy Law in Context: Press, Legislative, and Public Reactions Jeremy Patrick Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/annlsurvey Part of the Other Law Commons Recommended Citation Patrick, Jeremy (2010) "Canadian Blasphemy Law in Context: Press, Legislative, and Public Reactions," Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law: Vol. 16: Iss. 1, Article 9. Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/annlsurvey/vol16/iss1/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Academic Journals at GGU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law by an authorized administrator of GGU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Patrick: Canadian Blasphemy Law CANADIAN BLASPHEMY LAW IN CONTEXT: PRESS, LEGISLATIVE, AND PUBLIC REACTIONS JEREMY PATRICK† I. INTRODUCTION Canada has always outlawed blasphemy. From the earliest days of the New France period, through the era of “Upper” and “Lower” Canada, past Confederation and the eventual enactment of the original Criminal Code, and still today, blasphemy has been considered a criminal offence in the Canadian legal system.1 However, this prohibition, whether expressed through common law or statute, has rarely been enforced through actual prosecution.2 In the 117 years since the Criminal Code was enacted, its prohibition on blasphemous libel has been enforced only five times in reported cases.3 A study of the Criminal Code provision and these five prosecutions provides valuable information on the legal treatment of blasphemy throughout Canadian history.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring the World's Blasphemy Laws
    RESPECTING RIGHTS? Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws U.S. COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM A gavel is seen in a hearing room in Panama City April 7, 2016. REUTERS/Carlos Jasso UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESPECTING RIGHTS? Measuring the World’s Blasphemy Laws By Joelle Fiss and Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum JULY 2017 WWW.USCIRF.GOV COMMISSIONERS Daniel Mark, Chairman Sandra Jolley, Vice Chair Kristina Arriaga de Bucholz, Vice Chair Tenzin Dorjee Clifford D. May Thomas J. Reese, S.J. John Ruskay Jackie Wolcott Erin D. Singshinsuk Executive Director PROFESSIONAL STAFF Dwight Bashir, Director of Research and Policy Elizabeth K. Cassidy, Director of International Law and Policy Judith E. Golub, Director of Congressional Affairs & Policy and Planning John D. Lawrence, Director of Communications Sahar Chaudhry, Senior Policy Analyst Elise Goss-Alexander, Researcher Andrew Kornbluth, Policy Analyst Tiffany Lynch, Senior Policy Analyst Tina L. Mufford, Senior Policy Analyst Jomana Qaddour, Policy Analyst Karen Banno, Office Manager Roy Haskins, Manager of Finance and Administration Travis Horne, Communications Specialist This report, containing data collected, coded, and analyzed as of June 2016, was overseen by Elizabeth K. Cassidy, J.D., LL.M, Director of International Law and Policy at the U.S. Commis- sion on International Religious Freedom. At USCIRF, Elizabeth is a subject matter expert on international and comparative law issues related to religious freedom as well as U.S. refugee and asylum policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Hate Speech Laws and Blasphemy Laws: Parallels Show Problems with the U.N
    Emory International Law Review Volume 35 Issue 2 2021 Hate Speech Laws and Blasphemy Laws: Parallels Show Problems with the U.N. Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech Meghan Fischer Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/eilr Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Meghan Fischer, Hate Speech Laws and Blasphemy Laws: Parallels Show Problems with the U.N. Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech, 35 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 177 (2021). Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/eilr/vol35/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Emory Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Emory International Law Review by an authorized editor of Emory Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FISCHER_3.22.21 3/23/2021 4:02 PM HATE SPEECH LAWS AND BLASPHEMY LAWS: PARALLELS SHOW PROBLEMS WITH THE U.N. STRATEGY AND PLAN OF ACTION ON HATE SPEECH Meghan Fischer* ABSTRACT In May 2019, the United Nations Secretary-General introduced the U.N. Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech, an influential campaign that poses serious risks to religious and political minorities because its definition of hate speech parallels elements common to blasphemy laws. U.N. human rights entities have denounced blasphemy laws because they are vague, broad, and prone to arbitrary enforcement, enabling the authorities to use them to attack religious minorities, political opponents, and people who have minority viewpoints. Likewise, the Strategy and Plan of Action’s definition of hate speech is ambiguous and relies entirely on subjective interpretation, opening the door to arbitrary and malicious accusations and prosecutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Under What Circumstances, If Any, Should Lies Be Made Criminal? Bryan H
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 101 | Issue 2 Article 5 Spring 2011 The rC iminalization of Lying: Under What Circumstances, If Any, Should Lies Be Made Criminal? Bryan H. Druzin Jessica Li Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons Recommended Citation Bryan H. Druzin and Jessica Li, The Criminalization of Lying: Under What Circumstances, If Any, Should Lies Be Made Criminal?, 101 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 529 (2013). https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol101/iss2/5 This Criminal Law is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 0091-4169/11/10102-0529 THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY Vol. 101, No. 2 Copyright © 2011 by Northwestern University School of Law Printed in U.S.A. THE CRIMINALIZATION OF LYING: UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES, IF ANY, SHOULD LIES BE MADE CRIMINAL? BRYAN H. DRUZIN∗ & JESSICA LI** This Article argues that lying should be a crime. In doing so, we propose the creation of a wholly new category of crime, which we term “egregious lying causing serious harm.” The Article has two broad objectives: the first is to make the case why such a crime should even exist, and the second is to flesh out how this crime might be constructed. The main contribution of the Article lies in the radical nature of its stated aim: the outright criminalization of certain kinds of lies.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Code
    LAWS OF GRENADA REVISED EDITION CRIMINAL CODE CHAPTER 72A Act No. 76 of 1958 Amended by Act No. 23 of 1962 Act No. 36 of 1973 Act No. 32 of 1962 Act No. 12 of 1974 Act No. 1 of 1963 Act No. 3 of 1980 Act No. 7 of 1964 Act No. 16 of 1993 Act No. 5 of 1966 Act No. 36 of 1993 Act No. 10 of 1966 Act No. 34 of 1994 Act No. 45 of 1972 Act No. 9 of 2004 Act No. 18 of 1973 Act No. 11 of 2007 Act No. 35 of 1973 Act No. 15 of 2007 Printed and published with the authority of the Government of Grenada 1 [Issue 1/2011] CAP. 72A Criminal Code CHAPTER 72A CRIMINAL CODE ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Preliminary SECTION 1. Short title. 2. Arrangement of the Code. BOOK I General Provisions PART I Introductory Provisions TITLE I Preliminary Matters 3. Interpretation. 4. Provisions relating to a company and its officers. 5. Definition of public officer, etc. 6. General explanations with respect to the interpretation of expressions. 7. General rules of construction. 8. Extent of the jurisdiction. 9. Acts done partly beyond the jurisdiction. 10. Exclusion of other laws. 11. Saving of certain laws. PART II Rules as to Criminal Responsibility TITLE II General Explanations 12. Provisions relating to intent. 13. Provisions relating to negligence. 14. Provisions relating to causing an event. 15. Provisions relating to consent. 16. Provision relating to claim of right. 17. Provision relating to fraud. 18. Provisions relating to intoxication. 19. Provisions relating to the meaning and use of threats.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Submission for the OHCHR Expert Workshop on the Prohibition of Incitement to National, Racial Or
    OHCHR expert workshops on the prohibition of incitement to national, racial or religious hatred Expert workshop on Europe (9-10 February 2011, Vienna) Joint submission by Mr. Heiner Bielefeldt, Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief; Mr. Frank La Rue, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression; and Mr. Githu Muigai, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance I. Introduction The topic of the 2011 expert workshops on the prohibition of incitement to national, racial or religious hatred is highly relevant for our three mandates as Special Rapporteurs, i.e. on racism, freedom of religion or belief and freedom of opinion and expression. We welcome the organization by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights of these expert workshops and the possibility for us to contribute to these important discussions. The expert workshops touch upon the rights and freedoms enshrined in the following provisions of international human rights instruments: – Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) on freedom of thought, conscience and religion; – Article 19 of the UDHR and of the ICCPR on freedom of opinion and expression; – Article 20 of the ICCPR on the prohibition of any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence; and – Article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) on the eradication of incitement to racial discrimination as well as acts of violence or incitement to such acts.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Offences Act
    MINISTRY OF THELAWS ATTORNEY OF TRINIDAD GENERAL AND AND LEGAL TOBAGO AFFAIRS www.legalaffairs.gov.tt CRIMINAL OFFENCES ACT CHAPTER 11:01 Act 11 of 1844 Amended by 2 of 1852 2 of 1878 21 of 1887 20 of 1936 3 of 1945 45 of 1979 13 of 2014 Current Authorised Pages Pages Authorised (inclusive) by L.R.O. 1–7 .. UNOFFICIAL VERSION L.R.O. UPDATED TO 31ST DECEMBER 2016 MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERALLAWS OF AND TRINIDAD LEGAL AFFAIRS AND TOBAGOwww.legalaffairs.gov.tt 2 Chap. 11:01 Criminal Offences Note on Subsidiary Legislation This Chapter contains no subsidiary legislation. Note on Transfer of Provisions Sections 2A to 2E and section 11 of the Criminal Offences Ordinance, Ch. 4. No. 4 (1950 Ed.) have been transferred to the Criminal Law Act (Ch. 11:04). UNOFFICIAL VERSION UPDATED TO 31ST DECEMBER 2016 MINISTRY OF THELAWS ATTORNEY OF TRINIDAD GENERAL AND AND LEGAL TOBAGO AFFAIRS www.legalaffairs.gov.tt Criminal Offences Chap. 11:01 3 CHAPTER 11:01 CRIMINAL OFFENCES ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION 1. Short title. 2. Common law offences. 3. Personation. 4. Breaking out of prison. 5. Attempt to commit indictable offence. 6. Selling unwholesome provisions. 7. Cheat or fraud. 8. Offences under sections 4, 5 and 6. 9. Falsification of accounts. 10. Advertising reward for return of stolen property under certain conditions. UNOFFICIAL VERSION L.R.O. UPDATED TO 31ST DECEMBER 2016 MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERALLAWS OF AND TRINIDAD LEGAL AFFAIRS AND TOBAGOwww.legalaffairs.gov.tt 4 Chap. 11:01 Criminal Offences CHAPTER 11:01 CRIMINAL OFFENCES ACT 1950 Ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Remedies for Grand Corruption
    LEGAL REMEDIES FOR GRAND CORRUPTION THE ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This volume was compiled by Ken Hurwitz, senior legal officer for the Anticorruption Program of the Open Society Justice Initiative, and Richard E. Messick, a lawyer and consultant on anticorruption issues. It brings together in final form a series of papers that were first presented at a day of discussions on the worldwide legal fight against high-level corruption organized by the Open Society Justice Initiative and Oxford University’s Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict in June 2014. Several of the individual papers have been previously published on the Global Anticorrption Blog (https://globalanticorruptionblog.com/), which is edited by Richard E. Messick and Matthew Stephenson, professor of law at Harvard Law School. Our sincerest thanks to the authors for their inimitable contributions. Copyright © 2019 Open Society Foundations. This publication is available as a pdf on the Open Society Foundations website under a Creative Commons license that allows copying and distributing the publication, only in its entirety, as long as it is attributed to the Open Society Foundations and used for noncommercial educational or public policy purposes. Photographs may not be used separately from the publication. ISBN: 9781940983875 Published by: Open Society Foundations 224 West 57th Street New York, New York 10019 USA www.OpenSocietyFoundations.org For more information contact: Ken Hurwitz Open Society Justice Initiative [email protected] Cover, design, and layout by Ahlgrim Design Group Printing by GHP Media, Inc. LEGAL REMEDIES FOR GRAND CORRUPTION: THE ROLE OF CIVIL SOCIETY 1 CONTENTS 2 Foreword: Seeking Legal Remedies for Grand Corruption Ken Hurwitz 8 Introduction: Past Steps and Future Directions Richard E.
    [Show full text]
  • Double Jeopardy and Prosecution Appeals
    The Law Commission (LAW COM No 267) DOUBLE JEOPARDY AND PROSECUTION APPEALS Report on two references under section 3(1)(e) of the Law Commissions Act 1965 Presented to the Parliament of the United Kingdom by the Lord High Chancellor by Command of Her Majesty March 2001 Cm 5048 The Law Commission was set up by the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Mr Justice Carnwath CVO, Chairman Professor Hugh Beale Mr Charles Harpum Professor Martin Partington Judge Alan Wilkie, QC The Secretary of the Law Commission is Mr Michael Sayers and its offices are at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobalds Road, London WC1N 2BQ. The terms of this report were agreed on 24 January 2001. The text of this report is available on the Internet at: http://www.lawcom.gov.uk ii THE LAW COMMISSION DOUBLE JEOPARDY AND PROSECUTION APPEALS CONTENTS Paragraph Page PART I: INTRODUCTION 1 The reference on double jeopardy 1.1 1 The reference on prosecution appeals 1.7 3 The implications of human rights law 1.12 4 Our main recommendations 1.18 6 The timing of this report 1.22 6 PART II: THE PRESENT DOMESTIC LAW 8 The autrefois rule 2.2 8 Identity in law and fact 2.3 8 The need for a valid acquittal or conviction 2.6 9 The tainted acquittal procedure 2.9 10 Abuse of process The general principles 2.14 12 The Connelly principle 2.16 12 The Elrington principle 2.20 14 The rule against challenging a previous acquittal 2.22 15 Prosecution appeals 2.29 17 From the Crown Court Attorney-General’s
    [Show full text]