link to briefings documents at magnacartaplus.org
 

Magna Carta Plus News

back to magnacartaplus.org index page
orientation to the news at MagnaCartaPlus.org

short briefing dcuments at MagnaCartaPlus.org

This page provides occasional items, linked to the original articles, as we attempt to keep up with the rapidly changing situation on civil liberties.
Archive of old news service:
2002 - 2004

1st Jan to 9th Sept 2005

Google
 
Web magnacartaplus.org

On the consequences of the European Arrest Warrant

Update: In the original version of this article, I wrote that the European Arrest Warrant allows for extradition to take place if the offence is punishable by 1 year or more in prison in the country requesting extradition. This is only true if the offence exists in both jurisdictions, i.e. if dual criminality applies. As section 64(2) of the Extradition Act 2003 makes clear, extradition where there is no dual criminality requires the offence to be punishable by 3 years or more in prison. I have altered the article to correct this. Apologies for the mistake.

On the 1st October, Dr Frederick Toben, an Australian citizen, landed at Heathrow Airport whilst on a journey from America to Dubai.

He did not complete that journey.

Instead, he was arrested via a European Arrest Warrant, on a charge of ‘holocaust denial’, at the behest of the German government.

I strongly disagree with this man’s views, but he has as much right to express his views as I do. I am opposed to making holocaust denial an offence for the simple reason that it is contrary to freedom of expression. I also think it is wrong to prevent people, by law, from expressing scepticism or doubt about the generally accepted accounts of an historical events, since there is no guarantee that those accounts have managed to capture all the evidence surrounding those events or evaluate it fully and objectively. The best guarantee one can have is to allow people to make their arguments and to test each other’s arguments. Outlawing the expression of points of view that are in opposition to an officially accepted view means you hinder further advances in knowledge about the subject matter, not because the outlawed points of view are correct but because the debates and challenges that arise from allowing them to be expressed may lead to new insights or new evidence being discovered. Making an official point of view sacrosant turns history into dogma.

But this case is not merely about freedom of speech, or freedom of historical enquiry. It is also about the rule of law, and there are no British laws against holocaust denial.

So why has Toben been arrested? Because:

  • Toben runs a website that denies the holocaust happened.
  • Britain signed up to the European Arrest Warrant (EAW), which allows for fast-track extradition between EU states without any evidence being presented to the courts of the country performing the extradition and where there is no requirement that the conduct be an offence in both countries. The conduct needs only to be an offence in the country requesting extradition, so long as the offence falls into one of a broadly defined set of categories, and is punishable by 3 years or more in prison; Toben is apparently facing upto 5 years in a German prison.
  • With the internet, many countries, Britain included, are applying the principle that once someone downloads material in a particular jurisdiction (e.g. by reading a web page with their browser), that material has been published in that jurisdiction. Germany will therefore be claiming that Toben’s website has been published in Germany, even though he runs it from Australia, where there are also no laws making holocaust denial an offence, and thus that Toben committed an offence falling under the “Racism and Xenophobia” category that enabled them to request extradition under the EAW in the first place.

If Toben is extradited, then it will confirm that anyone (who is accused of) publishing, on the internet, any articles questioning the holocaust could be extradited to Germany from any other EU country without their local courts even getting a chance to see any evidence against them, regardless of whether their internet publications were legal in their own country or the country where the website is run from.

More generally, it means that one’s internet publications are effectively subject to the union of all the laws applying in the EU, where the offence is punishable by 3 or more years in prison, and which fall under the “Racism and Xenophobia” banner or any of the other 31 categories (e.g. “computer-related crime”), and you could be extradited to any other EU state on the accusation that your publication violated those laws. Anyone living in or travelling through any EU country can potentially be targetted with this legislation.

Google mapping Britain’s erosion of civil liberties

[Hat tip: UK Liberty]

This looks like an interesting project

Telegraph: Council officials told to question adults in public park without children

Posted by James Hammerton @ 9:53 pm on 9 September, 2008.
Categories political liberties, freedom of speech, British politics, culture of suspicion.
Edit This Permalink to this article

Update: UK Liberty has some good commentary on this story.

Fancy going for a stroll in a public park? Apparently, if you do so in the Telford and Wreckin council area, and fail to bring any children with you, you may find yourself questioned about what you’re doing and asked to leave, ostensibly in order to protect children from paedophiles. The Telegraph reports:

The policy came to light after two environmental campaigners dressed as penguins were thrown out of Telford Town Park when caught handing out leaflets on climate change.

Rachel Whittaker and Neil Donaldson, of the Wrekin Stop War pressure group, were told they had to leave the park because they had not undergone Criminal Records Bureau checks or risk assessments before being allowed near children.

David Ottley, Telford & Wrekin’s sports and recreation manager, said in a letter to them: “Our Town Park staff approach adults that are not associated with any children in the Town Park and request the reason for them being there.”

“In particular, this applies to those areas where children or more vulnerable groups gather, such as play facilities and the entrances to play areas.”

However Miss Whittaker, 34, said: “I’m outraged that my concern for the planet and for the future of all children can be turned into petty bureaucracy.

“It is dangerous as well as frightening people, it could start a hysterical society and punishes people who have done nothing wrong while giving an outlet for those with sinister motives a way of getting around it.

“I think they are reacting to what was is essence an expression to public expression of free speech - and how many child molesters dress up as penguins anyway?”

And so the culture of suspicion marches on…

China sentences elderly women to “reeducation through labour” for asking for permission to protest

[Hat tip: The Pub Philosopher]

Lindsey Hilsum, reporting for Channel 4 News:

I’m trying to put myself in the mind of the official from the Beijing Municipal Government who decided to send 79-year-old Mrs Wu and her 77-year-old neighbour Mrs Wang to the labour camp.

Maybe it was the way they wielded their walking sticks which made him decide they were “disturbing public order”.

The two women have applied five times for permission to protest in the designated Olympic Protest Zones; when they refused to give up, they were sentenced to one year’s “re-education through labour”.

NO2ID Nine: All charges dropped.

See my personal blog.

Freedom of speech roundup

There have been a number of freedom of speech related stories recently that I’ve only just got round to covering, ranging from the UN Human Rights Council’s recent decision to gather information about “abuses” of freedom of speech to a prominent British blog being sued by an individual connected to Hamas. All over the world it seems to me that freedom of speech is being attacked. The details of these recent stories can be found below:

(more…)

The erosion of the rights of the accused: Terror suspects

Posted by James Hammerton @ 8:31 pm on 16 July, 2008.
Categories political liberties, democracy and the rule of law, British politics.
Edit This Permalink to this article

Update: The Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill was passed by Parliament on Wednesday 16th July.

In Britain, if you are accused of terrorism:

Loss of liberties in the US since 9/11

One of the things I’d like to do with this blog is to shift it towards being less UK-centric. This is difficult given the sheer volume of anti-civil liberties legislation being generated in the UK, but occasionally I do get a chance to cover some non-UK material. For example, this website is dedicated to documenting the loss of civil liberties in the USA since 9/11. I’ve not yet read it in detail but it may be of interest to readers wishing to catch up on the US situation and/or compare it to the UK or elsewhere.

Why civil libertarians should back Davis’s re-election

Earlier I wrote an article arguing that David Davis’s resignation and by-election campaign opened up an opportunity to alter the political climate to be more friendly to civil liberties. I’ve seen various arguments put forward attacking Davis’s campaign, from people committed to civil liberties, and this article is a response to them. The arguments I’ve seen are as follows:

  1. It’s a safe Tory seat, and the second placed party is not standing anyone against him, so Davis is bound to win and therefore it’s not important. One person arguing this suggested the logical vote is therefore simply to stay at home.
  2. Davis’s record on civil liberties is not perfect and/or other candidates have stronger stances on civil liberties, so we should back them instead.
  3. It’s just a stunt from a politician seeking attention.

Below I tackle each of these points in turn and argue that:

  • Davis has already done the cause of civil liberties some service in helping reposition the Tory party and, with his resignation, in generating debate and publicity about the erosion of civil liberties.
  • If we’re to avoid a potential set-back on civil liberties, we need to ensure Davis is returned with more votes than he won last time round, and with a decent turnout.

(more…)

Nine NO2ID protestors arrested in Edinburgh

On Monday, 9 protestors, including me, all involved with the NO2ID campaign, were arrested in Edinburgh and charged with breach of the peace.

You can see some reports and discussion about this at the following links:

This STV report
This report in the Herald
This BBC Scotland report
A thread on NO2ID’s forums
Guy Herbert’s Samizdata article
Another thread on NO2ID’s forums

At this time, I’ll make the following points:

  • we were all peaceful at all times during the protest
  • only 1 protestor sneaked into the meeting. Geraint Bevan, the coordinator of NO2ID Scotland got into the meeting at the start under the cunning ruse of walking up to the registration desk and claiming to be one of the people named on the badges on display.
  • prior to entering the hotel, we were protesting peacefully outside, causing curiosity, amusement and the occasional message of support from the passing public.
  • when the hotel manager approached us and asked us to leave, Geraint (by this time physically thrown out of the meeting) asked if it were OK for us to leave after STV had conducted an interview with him. The manager agreed.
  • when the interview was over, we made to leave immediately, only to find the police had been called. At no point prior to this were we given any intimation the police were called or were going to be called. Prior to the hotel manager asking us to leave, we were not told by any member of staff that we should leave.
  • when we entered, we entered peacefully, quietly, carrying placards, with an STV camera crew in tow. The people at the head of our procession did not wear masks.
  • we were officially arrested at 12.30 (after a considerable length of time when the police took our details).
  • we regard this charge as a ridiculous jumped up charge.
  • we will be fighting this charge.
  • Geraint faces a separate charge related to events in the meeting. This will also be fought.
« Previous PageNext Page »

email feedback@magnacartaplus.org

© magnacartaplus.org2008, 2007, 2006 [1 December]

variable words
prints as variable A4 pages (on my printer and set-up)

abstracts of documents on magnacartaplus.org UK Acts of Parliament click for news from magnacartaplus.org orientation to magnacartaplus.org orientation button links to other relevant sites links

Powered by WordPress