EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia

EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia (351235)	Home · Maps · About

Home > OTChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

(351235)	view threaded
EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 4 01:35:52 2008 edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d But all these reports are wrong about the EU . . . no, they aren't. The article focuses on Britons (who will be treated with prejudice here), but all EU citizens will be subject to this new decree. At the federal rulers' discretion. Times of London From The Times September 3, 2008 EU approves proposal to try Britons in their absence in foreign courts Frances Gibb, Legal Editor British citizens could be convicted in their absence by foreign courts for traffic, credit card or other criminal offences under plans approved in principle by the European Parliament. The proposals would allow citizens to be extradited automatically under fast-track procedures at the request of another European Union country on the basis of a decision by the foreign court. The overwhelming adoption by the Parliament of the proposals, which now go to the Council of Ministers, was condemned yesterday as “throwing habeas corpus out of the window”. Philip Bradbourn, the Conservative justice and home affairs spokesman in the European Parliament, said: “This initiative would enable courts to pass judgments in absentia. It goes against one of the most fundamental corner-stones of British justice — that the accused has a right to defend himself at trial. If other EU countries want to go ahead with this proposal that’s their choice, but the British Government should have no part (of it).” The proposal has been put forward by seven EU countries, including Britain, to strengthen procedural safeguards in the European Union and mutual recognition of processes in criminal proceedings. Countries can opt out from the proposals even if they are adopted by the Council of Ministers. The European Criminal Bar Association opposed the plans, saying that they were “by their very nature a violation of the fundamental procedural rights of the accused”. In an open letter to all MEPs it says: “The rights of European citizens will be further undermined because in absentia judgments will result in the surrender of European citizens on the basis of a judgment given at a trial in which they never had the chance to participate. “One member state could issue a European arrest warrant on the basis of an in absentia judgment, although the accused never had the chance to be heard — for example, after a traffic accident or the use of a credit card in that country.” The seven countries that proposed the new system were Slovenia, France, the Czech Republic, Sweden, Slovakia, Germany and Britain, according to the Conservatives in Brussels. The scheme would allow courts to make judgments without defendants being present where they were imposing fines or confiscation orders; when dealing with criminal offences carrying a custodial sentence; and when issuing the European arrest warrant. It could cover offences such as traffic trangressions, theft, shoplifting or fraud, up to assault or murder. People who have been accused in their absence have the right to a retrial or the right of appeal when extradited. Countries will not be able to enforce judgments where a person was not properly summoned or informed of the trial procedures, but the campaigning group Fair Trials International says that this appeal safeguard is in adequate. It says: “Retrials can raise serious issues such as the disappearance of evidence, difficulty in locating witnesses, and difficulty in witnesses accurately recalling facts due to elapse of time.” The group adds that it “remains deeply concerned that the right to a retrial following judgments in absentia can be meaningless or ineffectual while the EU lacks harmonisation of basic procedural rights. The system of mutual recognition can only work if it is built on a solid foundation of mutual trust — and this must include assurances that minimum standards of basic defence rights will be applied in every case in every member state.” A spokesman for Conservative MEPs said: “Once extradited, (defendants) would have to serve the sentence in that country. The individual can appeal in the country they have been extradited to but would be held in custody and not have the safeguards which are in place in the UK. We have no idea why the UK Government has chosen to sponsor this proposal — it is still a mystery.” The Council of Ministers put forward the document for consultation with the European Parliament. The amended document was presented yesterday to the full Parliament and was adopted with 609 votes in favour and 60 against, with 14 abstentions. The Parliament said in a statement: “The EU wants to create a common area for justice, which requires the mutual recognition of criminal law judgments by member states.” The document will be presented to the Council of Ministers within the next three months for a decision on which points will be incorporated. Once a unanimous agreement is reached, the document will start the process of becoming national law.
Post a New Response

(351494)	view threaded
Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia
Posted by Olog-hai* on Thu Sep 4 19:32:14 2008, in response to EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 4 01:35:52 2008.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Now it's BBC's turn at the story. And surprise surprise, they're trying to put a positive spin on the death of habeas corpus . . . only one step away from internment. Quite a slippery slope. (Meanwhile, our Supreme Court judges are granting writs of habeas corpus to terrorists.) EU trial in absence plan defended The government has welcomed EU plans to allow British citizens to be tried in their absence in other member states. British subjects could also be extradited automatically at the request of other EU states under the proposals. Ministers say it will prevent them fleeing to other member states to escape justice and increase co-operation between legal systems. But the Conservatives and UKIP say it undermines a fundamental principle of British justice. Under the EU plan, courts would be allowed to pass judgement in criminal cases and when issuing fines or European Arrest Warrants without the defendants being present. People accused in their absence would then have the right to a retrial or the right of appeal when extradited. Rare The plan was backed by the European Parliament by 609 votes to 60 and now goes to the Council of Ministers for final approval. It is designed to end uncertainty among member states about whether to recognise in absentia judgements and to make the European Arrest Warrant more effective. But opponents say it would represent a major change to British law, where trials in absentia were until 2001 banned and are still extremely rare. Pieter Cleppe, of pressure group Open Europe, said: "This proposal could open the door to serious miscarriages of justice and ministers should not be supporting it." Conservative justice and home affairs spokesman Philip Bradbourn told The Evening Standard: "It goes against one of the most fundamental cornerstones of British justice." 'Destroy freedoms' Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party, said the plan removed basic rights long enshrined in British law. "If we're accused we must be able to know who accused us. If we are to be tried for a crime we must be able to mount a defence. "Yet now we can be dragged away to another country to rot in jail without there even being a pretence of a fair trial." Mr Farage added: "If other European nations want to adopt our own higher protections, our greater civil liberties, then they are of course quite free to, without EU compulsion. "But why should we destroy our own freedoms just to fit in with them?" The Ministry of Justice said the plan would "increase legal certainty and improve mutual trust amongst member states". A spokesman said: "The initiative will ensure that there is clarity as to when the courts of one member state recognise a decision taken by another member state in a person's absence. "This will help ensure that a person cannot escape justice by fleeing to another member state, whilst also ensuring that persons are only returned where to do so is appropriate — for example where there will be a retrial."
Post a New Response

(351501)	view threaded
Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Sep 4 19:43:40 2008, in response to Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 4 19:32:14 2008. edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d What does Habeas Corpus have to do with this? Do you realize that the EU is trying to be more or less unified? So that someone that wrongfully dicks people in France can't go to England to get away with it. Just like you can't commit a crime in NJ and go to NY to run away. However, a trial without a person there is not a good idea at all. But hasn't it happened in the US, or no?
Post a New Response

(351521)	view threaded
Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 4 20:18:34 2008, in response to Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Sep 4 19:43:40 2008. edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d What does Habeas Corpus have to do with this? Everything. Read the articles. Do you realize that the EU is trying to be more or less unified? You don't know what you're talking about on this score (what else is new). The people of the member countries don't want to be unified; the politicians want to force it on them. And that has absolutely nothing to do with this matter. So that someone that wrongfully dicks people in France can't go to England to get away with it. Just like you can't commit a crime in NJ and go to NY to run away. You're getting extradition and in absentia mixed up. The EU wants to do it backwards. However, a trial without a person there is not a good idea at all. But hasn't it happened in the US, or no? No. It's illegal in the USA. Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 of the US Constitution guarantees non-suspension of the writ of habeas corpus except against those who war against the country.
Post a New Response

(351525)	view threaded
Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Sep 4 20:24:43 2008, in response to Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 4 20:18:34 2008. edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d But there is an exception in our law as well. So they can try "terrorists" without them being at court. Maybe my interpretation is wrong. But seriously, do you think all those European countries will EVER be unified? All the cultures are vastly different, so I doubt it. Even if politicians want it, I am sure many people will say "no way, you venecian bastard, STEP OFF!!!", and they will take those political bastards down. However, maybe I am wrong. England, especially London, and the areas around it, are police states, and there wasn't much protest. But maybe the French aren't such push-overs as the Britts?
Post a New Response

(351526)	view threaded
Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia
Posted by LuchAAA* on Thu Sep 4 20:39:57 2008, in response to Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 4 20:18:34 2008.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d are you a history professor? seriously. you must do something by day that exposes you to this stuff.
Post a New Response

(351701)	view threaded
Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia
Posted by Olog-hai* on Fri Sep 5 00:10:21 2008, in response to Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Sep 4 20:39:57 2008.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d seriously. you must do something by day that exposes you to this stuff Yeah, just entering keywords on Google News, and looking at other websites that have newsfeeds. Obama calls the EU "History's Most Successful Democratization Strategy". Since that's the case, I wonder what his concept of democracy really is—is it the EU's brand of sneaky totalitarianism?
Post a New Response

(352414)	view threaded
Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Sep 6 17:42:27 2008, in response to Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Sep 4 20:24:43 2008. edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d England, especially London, and the areas around it, are police states Where did you hear that?
Post a New Response

(352416)	view threaded
Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia
Posted by BMTLines on Sat Sep 6 17:48:31 2008, in response to Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Thu Sep 4 19:43:40 2008. edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d What does Habeas Corpus have to do with this? Everything - it deprives you of a right to a fair trial and to confront the witnesses against you Do you realize that the EU is trying to be more or less unified? Olog is right - the governments are - NOT the people. So that someone that wrongfully dicks people in France can't go to England to get away with it. They should be apprehended and extradited - not tried in absentia. Just like you can't commit a crime in NJ and go to NY to run away. That is different from being tried in absentia.
Post a New Response

(366027)	view threaded
Re: EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia
Posted by Olog-hai* on Tue Oct 7 20:32:06 2008, in response to EU Tossing Habeas Corpus Aside?—Proposes to Try Citizens In Absentia, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 4 01:35:52 2008.* edf40wrjww2msgDetailOT:detailStr fiogf49gjkf0d Last bit of news on this subject was 9/20, out of the Daily Telegraph. Let's see how far this goes, especially since the European Commission doesn't need the Parliament to actually put this into law. EU extradition law faces legal challenge Civil rights groups are considering a legal challenge to new EU laws that would allow British citizens to be extradited automatically if they are convicted in their absence by foreign courts. By David Harrison Last Updated: 1:11AM BST 21 Sep 2008 Liberty and Fair Trials International said the new law, passed by the European Parliament and certain to be ratified by member states, threatened the "fundamental principle of the right to a fair trial" and they were considering a challenge in the European Court of Human Rights. The proposals would allow British — and other European Union citizens — to be extradited automatically to another EU country to serve their sentence on the basis of a decision by a foreign court. At present, British courts have some discretion to refuse to extradite a British citizen. But the new law will sweep away that discretion and make it almost automatic for a British citizen convicted abroad to be extradited to serve his sentence. Shami Chakrabarti, Liberty's director, said: "This isn't about being pro- or anti-Europe, it's about what kind of Europe we want to live in – surely one where people aren't taken from one country to another without so much as a case to answer in a local court?" A spokeswoman for Fair Trials International said: "We are very concerned that the safeguards are inadequate and we are considering a legal challenge under the Human Rights Act which guarantees all individuals a fair trial." Conservative politicians backed the civil rights groups. Dominic Grieve, the Shadow home secretary, said the proposal "undermines fundamental principles of British justice. "This is the latest government failure to defend the British idea of fairness in Europe," he said. "First, they gave up UK control over deportation of convicted criminals. Then, they signed up to hand over a wide range of our personal data to 26 European states. "Now they are prepared to abandon British citizens to face European punishments without trial." Philip Bradbourn, the Conservative justice and home affairs spokesman in the European Parliament, said: "If other EU countries want to go ahead with this proposal that's their choice, but the British Government should have no part of it." The plans amount to "throwing habeas corpus out of the window", he said. The Attorney-General said the new law, which will be discussed by EU Justice ministers in Luxembourg next month, was "an exercise in raising standards not reducing them". The new rules would "clarify the circumstances in which a person may be sent to another member state after being tried there in their absence". It would guarantee anybody convicted in absentia the right to a retrial where they were not represented by a lawyer or didn't receive proper notice of what was going on, he said. "The measure ensures that no one will serve a sentence without having participated, or had the opportunity to participate, in a trial. No such guarantees exist at present." But critics said the safeguards would not prevent miscarriages of justice because EU countries have widely varying standards of justice and different levels of protection for those accused of a crime. Under the new proposals the safeguards can be met by simply ticking boxes to say, for example, that correct procedures have been followed. The EU has expressed concern about some of the former Eastern European states such as Romania and Bulgaria, where corruption is rife and where people accused of crimes have nowhere near the same protection as in the UK. The European Bar Association said the new rules were "a violation of the fundamental procedural rights of the accused". Pieter Cleppe, a lawyer for Open Europe, an independent think tank set up by some of the UK's leading business people, said the new law was "a pretext for making it easier to extradite people." Some cases have already caused alarm and campaigners fear that the new law will lead to more controversial cases and possible miscarriages of justice. Fair Trials International is concerned about the case of a British man who was on holiday in Romania in 2004 and charged with sexual relations with a minor. He was held in Romania for three months, even though his victim failed to give evidence against him in court. He was released in November 2004 and ordered to leave Romania within five days. Then, in March 2007, after Romania had joined the EU, he was shocked to receive an email from the British embnassy in Bucharest informing him that he had been tried and convicted in a Romanian court in absentia and sentenced to seven years in prison. The sentence had been confirmed on appeal, he was told. Another concern is that, even if the person convicted is informed of the proceedings against them and returns for the trial he may face time spent in prison during investigation and trial before a final verdict, since bail is refused in many continental courts. Enrico Mariotti, an Italian living in England for 14 years, was tried in his absence and convicted to 26 years for allegedly taking part in the kidnap and murder of an Italian duke in 1977. The only evidence against him was what his English barrister Helen Malcolm QC called "double hearsay", which would have been unacceptable in Britain. Mr. Mariotti's trial in Italy took six years, and if he had returned to stand trial he would almost certainly had to spend those years waiting in prison. He decided not to turn up for his trial. But last year he was extradited by John Reid, the Home Secretary. Mr. Mariotti is now 67 and faces 25 more years in jail. Yet no Italian court has ever heard what he may have to say and his case is closed.
Post a New Response

[ Return to the Message Index ]