The Strasbourg court has been hearing a case involving two people stopped near an arms fair in London in 2003.
It said that Kevin Gillan and Pennie Quinton's right to respect for a private and family life was violated.
Home Office Minister David Hanson MP said he was "disappointed" and would considering whether to appeal.
Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 allows the home secretary to authorise police to make random searches in certain circumstances.
But the European Court of Human Rights said the pair's rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated.
The court said the stop and search powers were "not sufficiently circumscribed" and there were not "adequate legal safeguards against abuse".
It also concluded that "the risks of the discriminatory use of the powers" were "a very real consideration".
The pair were awarded 33,850 euros (£30,400) to cover legal costs.
They were both stopped outside the Defence Systems and Equipment International exhibition at the Excel Centre in London Docklands in 2003, where there had already been protests and demonstrations.
Mr Gillan, 32, from London, was detained by police for about 20 minutes as he was cycling to join the demonstration.
Ms Quinton, 39, a journalist from London, was in the area to film the protests. She said she felt she was detained for about 30 minutes, although police records said it was five minutes.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4's The World At One, Ms Quinton said she hoped the ruling would lead to the government drawing up a "fairer body of legislation to protect us".
She said: "The court hasn't said that there's no longer any scope for stops and searches, but that safeguards need to be in place to prevent misuse of these powers, because right now if somebody is stopped and searched, they have got no redress if they feel they were mistreated during the stop and search process.
"It's not about saying that there's no need for stop and search. What we're really saying is people have a right to privacy and there needs to be a balance between police powers to ensure our safety but also our rights to a private life."
Mr Gillan said: "It's fantastic news after a long struggle. I look to the government for a strong response."
Both were represented by Corinna Ferguson, legal officer for Liberty, who said the pressure group had "consistently warned" the government about the "dangers" of the powers.
Ms Ferguson added: "The public, police and Court of Human Rights all share our concerns for privacy, protest, race equality and community solidarity that come with this sloppy law.
"In the coming weeks, parliamentarians must finally sort out this mess."
But Mr Hanson, the policing and security minister, said he was disappointed at the decision given that the government had won all previous challenges in the UK courts.
He said: "Stop and search under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 is an important tool in a package of measures in the ongoing fight against terrorism."
'Balancing exercise'
Lord Carlile, the government's independent reviewer of anti-terrorist legislation, told the World At One that the implications of the ruling were potentially "quite serious" and may require a change in the law.
He added: "In my view, section 44 is being used far too often on a random basis without any reasoning behind its use.
"The fundamental point that the court is making is that it increases the possibility of random interference with the legitimate liberties of the citizen.
"On the other hand, we have to be safe against terrorism. There is therefore a very difficult balancing exercise to be done and I'm sure Section 44 will come under intelligent scrutiny in the coming months."
The decision overturned a 2003 High Court ruling - subsequently upheld by the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords - that the use of stop and search, and any consequent violation of human rights, was proportionate under the European Convention on Human Rights and justified in the light of the threat of terrorism.
The Section 44 search powers have proved controversial, and in May last year the Metropolitan Police in London said they would be scaled back.
The force had faced criticism that such searches had been alienating people from ethnic minorities in the capital.
Its commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, said the powers should be restricted to "iconic" sites, including Parliament and Buckingham Palace. (my view)-justified WTF is stopping innocent people has to do with being"justified"that's the pigs excuse for"doing their jobs"when in fact..they do not,they are,PEDOS,PERVERTS AND IGNORANT assholes yes.....they strip search innocent people to....even kids.......that's paedophilia right there and they have the nerve to say its justified,the government WON'T sort this section 44 crap out.you want to know why?..to keep a close eye on us all,to be nosey,to always spy on people and most of all...TO CONTROL us all,to keep us scared and"IN LINE" to them WE are PRISONERS and they are the WARDEN'S,they kill innocent people to and yet they carry guns....we can't even protect ourselves and when we do we go to prison for protecting our loved ones or our property....I'm telling you this now sweethearts.i will do whats necessary to protect my family and friends from violence.....the pigs have no right to arrest me for doing something that's keeps us from being beaten,from being killed or other....they have NO RIGHT!
About HIM-I AM A FAN OF THE BAND"HIM"
Tuesday, 12 January 2010
Stop-and-search powers ruled illegal by European court
Police powers to use terror laws to stop and search people without grounds for suspicion are illegal, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled.
The Strasbourg court has been hearing a case involving two people stopped near an arms fair in London in 2003.
It said that Kevin Gillan and Pennie Quinton's right to respect for a private and family life was violated.
Home Office Minister David Hanson MP said he was "disappointed" and would considering whether to appeal.
Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 allows the home secretary to authorise police to make random searches in certain circumstances.
But the European Court of Human Rights said the pair's rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated.
The court said the stop and search powers were "not sufficiently circumscribed" and there were not "adequate legal safeguards against abuse".
It also concluded that "the risks of the discriminatory use of the powers" were "a very real consideration".
The pair were awarded 33,850 euros (£30,400) to cover legal costs.
They were both stopped outside the Defence Systems and Equipment International exhibition at the Excel Centre in London Docklands in 2003, where there had already been protests and demonstrations.
Mr Gillan, 32, from London, was detained by police for about 20 minutes as he was cycling to join the demonstration.
Ms Quinton, 39, a journalist from London, was in the area to film the protests. She said she felt she was detained for about 30 minutes, although police records said it was five minutes.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4's The World At One, Ms Quinton said she hoped the ruling would lead to the government drawing up a "fairer body of legislation to protect us".
She said: "The court hasn't said that there's no longer any scope for stops and searches, but that safeguards need to be in place to prevent misuse of these powers, because right now if somebody is stopped and searched, they have got no redress if they feel they were mistreated during the stop and search process.
"It's not about saying that there's no need for stop and search. What we're really saying is people have a right to privacy and there needs to be a balance between police powers to ensure our safety but also our rights to a private life."
Mr Gillan said: "It's fantastic news after a long struggle. I look to the government for a strong response."
Both were represented by Corinna Ferguson, legal officer for Liberty, who said the pressure group had "consistently warned" the government about the "dangers" of the powers.
Ms Ferguson added: "The public, police and Court of Human Rights all share our concerns for privacy, protest, race equality and community solidarity that come with this sloppy law.
"In the coming weeks, parliamentarians must finally sort out this mess."
But Mr Hanson, the policing and security minister, said he was disappointed at the decision given that the government had won all previous challenges in the UK courts.
He said: "Stop and search under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 is an important tool in a package of measures in the ongoing fight against terrorism."
'Balancing exercise'
Lord Carlile, the government's independent reviewer of anti-terrorist legislation, told the World At One that the implications of the ruling were potentially "quite serious" and may require a change in the law.
He added: "In my view, section 44 is being used far too often on a random basis without any reasoning behind its use.
"The fundamental point that the court is making is that it increases the possibility of random interference with the legitimate liberties of the citizen.
"On the other hand, we have to be safe against terrorism. There is therefore a very difficult balancing exercise to be done and I'm sure Section 44 will come under intelligent scrutiny in the coming months."
The decision overturned a 2003 High Court ruling - subsequently upheld by the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords - that the use of stop and search, and any consequent violation of human rights, was proportionate under the European Convention on Human Rights and justified in the light of the threat of terrorism.
The Section 44 search powers have proved controversial, and in May last year the Metropolitan Police in London said they would be scaled back.
The force had faced criticism that such searches had been alienating people from ethnic minorities in the capital.
Its commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, said the powers should be restricted to "iconic" sites, including Parliament and Buckingham Palace. (my view)-justified WTF is stopping innocent people has to do with being"justified"that's the pigs excuse for"doing their jobs"when in fact..they do not,they are,PEDOS,PERVERTS AND IGNORANT assholes yes.....they strip search innocent people to....even kids.......that's paedophilia right there and they have the nerve to say its justified,the government WON'T sort this section 44 crap out.you want to know why?..to keep a close eye on us all,to be nosey,to always spy on people and most of all...TO CONTROL us all,to keep us scared and"IN LINE" to them WE are PRISONERS and they are the WARDEN'S,they kill innocent people to and yet they carry guns....we can't even protect ourselves and when we do we go to prison for protecting our loved ones or our property....I'm telling you this now sweethearts.i will do whats necessary to protect my family and friends from violence.....the pigs have no right to arrest me for doing something that's keeps us from being beaten,from being killed or other....they have NO RIGHT!
The Strasbourg court has been hearing a case involving two people stopped near an arms fair in London in 2003.
It said that Kevin Gillan and Pennie Quinton's right to respect for a private and family life was violated.
Home Office Minister David Hanson MP said he was "disappointed" and would considering whether to appeal.
Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 allows the home secretary to authorise police to make random searches in certain circumstances.
But the European Court of Human Rights said the pair's rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated.
The court said the stop and search powers were "not sufficiently circumscribed" and there were not "adequate legal safeguards against abuse".
It also concluded that "the risks of the discriminatory use of the powers" were "a very real consideration".
The pair were awarded 33,850 euros (£30,400) to cover legal costs.
They were both stopped outside the Defence Systems and Equipment International exhibition at the Excel Centre in London Docklands in 2003, where there had already been protests and demonstrations.
Mr Gillan, 32, from London, was detained by police for about 20 minutes as he was cycling to join the demonstration.
Ms Quinton, 39, a journalist from London, was in the area to film the protests. She said she felt she was detained for about 30 minutes, although police records said it was five minutes.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4's The World At One, Ms Quinton said she hoped the ruling would lead to the government drawing up a "fairer body of legislation to protect us".
She said: "The court hasn't said that there's no longer any scope for stops and searches, but that safeguards need to be in place to prevent misuse of these powers, because right now if somebody is stopped and searched, they have got no redress if they feel they were mistreated during the stop and search process.
"It's not about saying that there's no need for stop and search. What we're really saying is people have a right to privacy and there needs to be a balance between police powers to ensure our safety but also our rights to a private life."
Mr Gillan said: "It's fantastic news after a long struggle. I look to the government for a strong response."
Both were represented by Corinna Ferguson, legal officer for Liberty, who said the pressure group had "consistently warned" the government about the "dangers" of the powers.
Ms Ferguson added: "The public, police and Court of Human Rights all share our concerns for privacy, protest, race equality and community solidarity that come with this sloppy law.
"In the coming weeks, parliamentarians must finally sort out this mess."
But Mr Hanson, the policing and security minister, said he was disappointed at the decision given that the government had won all previous challenges in the UK courts.
He said: "Stop and search under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 is an important tool in a package of measures in the ongoing fight against terrorism."
'Balancing exercise'
Lord Carlile, the government's independent reviewer of anti-terrorist legislation, told the World At One that the implications of the ruling were potentially "quite serious" and may require a change in the law.
He added: "In my view, section 44 is being used far too often on a random basis without any reasoning behind its use.
"The fundamental point that the court is making is that it increases the possibility of random interference with the legitimate liberties of the citizen.
"On the other hand, we have to be safe against terrorism. There is therefore a very difficult balancing exercise to be done and I'm sure Section 44 will come under intelligent scrutiny in the coming months."
The decision overturned a 2003 High Court ruling - subsequently upheld by the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords - that the use of stop and search, and any consequent violation of human rights, was proportionate under the European Convention on Human Rights and justified in the light of the threat of terrorism.
The Section 44 search powers have proved controversial, and in May last year the Metropolitan Police in London said they would be scaled back.
The force had faced criticism that such searches had been alienating people from ethnic minorities in the capital.
Its commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, said the powers should be restricted to "iconic" sites, including Parliament and Buckingham Palace. (my view)-justified WTF is stopping innocent people has to do with being"justified"that's the pigs excuse for"doing their jobs"when in fact..they do not,they are,PEDOS,PERVERTS AND IGNORANT assholes yes.....they strip search innocent people to....even kids.......that's paedophilia right there and they have the nerve to say its justified,the government WON'T sort this section 44 crap out.you want to know why?..to keep a close eye on us all,to be nosey,to always spy on people and most of all...TO CONTROL us all,to keep us scared and"IN LINE" to them WE are PRISONERS and they are the WARDEN'S,they kill innocent people to and yet they carry guns....we can't even protect ourselves and when we do we go to prison for protecting our loved ones or our property....I'm telling you this now sweethearts.i will do whats necessary to protect my family and friends from violence.....the pigs have no right to arrest me for doing something that's keeps us from being beaten,from being killed or other....they have NO RIGHT!
Woman jailed for 'worshipping tea pot'-THIS IS THE ODDEST STORY I HAVE PUBLISHED TO DATE
A sharia court in Malaysia jailed a woman for joining a "tea-pot worshipping" cult.
Kamariah Ali, a 57 year old former teacher, was arrested in 2005 when the government of the Muslim majority country demolished the two storey high sacred tea pot and other infrastructure of the "heretical" Sky Kingdom cult.
For the eccentric sect, which emphasised ecumenical dialogue between religions, the tea pot symbolized the purity of water and "love pouring from heaven".
But in Malaysia, despite constitutional guarantees of freedom of worship, born Muslims such as Mrs Ali are forbidden from converting to other religions.
Passing sentence, the Sharia judge Mohammed Abdullah said: "The court is not convinced that the accused has repented and is willing to abandon any teachings contrary to Islam. I pray God will open the doors of your heart, Kamariah."
Mrs Ali has already been jailed once for apostasy, for 20 months in 1992.
"This has to stop. They can’t be sending her again and again to prison for this," her lawyer, Sa'adiah Din, told reporters.
"She informed the court that she is not a Muslim. She doesn't come under Sharia court anymore."
The case underlines the dissatisfaction of non-Muslim Malaysians, who make up just under half the population, ahead of the country’s most contentious election in a generation this Saturday.
Yet analysts say gerrymandering, vote buying, press censorship and a virtual ban on opposition rallies make the government unbeatable. Last year 31,000 people over 100 years old were found on the electoral register. They were alleged "phantom voters", who have helped keep the ruling coalition in power since independence 50 years ago.
The population is divided between Hindus of Indian origin, Christian and Buddhist ethnic Chinese and a narrow majority of ethnic Malays who are legally deemed Muslim by birth and whose interests the government is sworn to protect.
Last autumn a protest by Hindus, angered by perceived discrimination such as the demolition of temples, was broken up with tear gas and water canon.
The community has long standing grievances. In one emotional case, the first Malaysian to climb Mt Everest -Maniam Moorthy- was declared a Muslim after his death and given a Muslim burial, to the consternation of his original Hindu community.
Last week Christian churches made a rare political intervention, urging voters to choose candidates who support freedom of worship. Christians have suffered several seizures of bible shipments by customs authorities in recent months.
The rise of sharia law in parallel to the civil code has alarmed both minority faiths, and spawned several controversial judgements in cases of religious conversion and interfaith marriage. The Malaysian government has been implicated in several corruption scandals in recent months and is blamed for a struggling economy.
Analysts say the politicisation of religion in the country is a complex phenomenon but cite among its causes the government's need to draw dissatisfied Muslim voters away from the relatively radical Islamic opposition.(my view)-LOL come on how is worshipping a tea pot more crazy then worshipping your fake and over fictionalized "prophet"(and i use that term as BULLSHIT as the way brown people use slavery as an excuse or the term racist)Mohammed
Jail sentence for man who 'massaged' meat
Mark Zachary, 51, from the city of Orangeburg in South Carolina, was given the maximum sentence after jurors found him guilty of shoplifting.
In his defence, Zachary claimed he wasn't stealing the meat but merely giving it a "massaging".
But according to the Times and Democrat, when a store manager approached Zachary about the unusual object under his shirt, he fled and ran straight into the arms of an off-duty police officer.
Prosecutors argued that the 10-year sentence was justified because the theft was Zachary's ninth offence.(my view)- Some might say 10 years to a bit harsh but 10 is the right sentence for this guy...why?...because obviously he does NOT learn so they were right to give him 10.......on another note..Barbara handles my meat everyday and tries to run off with it:) hehehehe........but i never sent my baby to jail...:)well..i do chain her up ect
Best And Worst Dressed......one of each 1#
Lady GaGa-was voted best dressed in 2009 WTF,and Gordon Brown-voted worst dress of 2009
Sex doll that knows her football
A US company claims it has developed "the world's first sex robot" which can converse with the owner - even about Manchester United.
A US company claims it has developed "the world's first sex robot" which can converse with the owner - even about Manchester United.
At a demonstration at the Adult Entertainment Expo in Las Vegas on Saturday, the dark-haired, negligee-clad robot said "I love holding hands with you" when it sensed that its creator touched its hand.
But it's not all good clean fun. Another action, this one unprintable, elicited a rather different vocal response from Roxxxy the robot(my view)-Why did they have to fuck up a sex toy(robot) and program her first sex discussion to be about football?...what the fuck....what does football have to do with sex....NOTHING! so men get erections and turns them on talking about over grown stupid pathetic boys(not men)in shorts ect....kicking around pig skin? ok.......a sex robot is a good idea for lonely people......but incorporating football with sex is SICK,football turns me off...anyways has,how can anyone find that talking about sport sexy?........i'd rather have Cherry 2000 and have done with it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
