Man convicted of assaulting six-year-old son loses appeal against conviction

By Mitchell Skilling

It was argued by the appellant, WM, that the trial judge had incorrectly directed the jury that they could convict him of assaulting his son, A, without mutually corroborating evidence from the second charge.

The appeal was heard by the Lord Justice Clerk, Lady Dorrian, together with Lord Malcolm and Lord Matthews. W Hay, advocate, appeared for the appellant and A Edwards QC for the Crown.

Generalised comments

The appellant was convicted following trial of two charges of assault. The first related to his son, A, then aged 6, whom he had repeatedly struck over the head and pulled by the hair over a 5-month period. The second charge was of assaulting another boy, B, over the first 4 months of his life and failing to provide and seek appropriate medical aid for him. He had cohabited with the mother of the children, JG, and maintained that he was also B’s father, however there was some doubt surrounding this. 

Evidence in respect of the first charge came from a Joint Investigative Interview recording of A made when he was 6, and cross-examination on commission at the time of trial, when he was aged 14. During cross-examination he stated that the allegations in the JII were not false and that he was told to make them up by his grandmother.  

There was additional corroborative evidence in respect of charge 1 in the form of comments made by the appellant in telephone calls to JG during his period of remand, during which she told him: “well stop hittin’ them”. The jury were directed that in respect of each charge they could convict on the basis of the evidence led on those charges alone, treating the various statements made by the appellant as admissions. As an alternative, they were also told that they could convict on the basis of mutual corroboration. 

It was submitted that the responses made by the appellant in the calls could not be properly regarded as an unequivocal admission in relation to the conduct libelled in charge 1. The comments were too generalised to be capable of being construed as such, and the appellant had not admitted to any clear or specific allegation. Esto the Crown’s position that his failure to contradict JG’s comments was significant was correct, the trial judge did not direct the jury on how to assess his lack of response. 

Entirely open 

Delivering the opinion of the court, Lady Dorrian observed generally: “It is well established that it is not only clear and unequivocal admissions which have evidential value. The same applies where the significance of the evidence is that an appellant had failed to respond or react to an allegation in circumstances where that failure could be regarded as criminative. However, it is important to distinguish the case where such evidence is relied upon as the primary evidence in a circumstantial case, and one where it is relied upon as corroboration of other evidence which constitutes the primary evidence.” 

She continued: “Everything depends on the context. However the present case is one in which there was clear primary evidence, should the jury choose to accept it. It was entirely open to the jury to accept the evidence in chief as the truth and to reject the evidence given on commission. The point which then arises is whether that evidence was sufficiently corroborated.” 

Analysing the content of the calls, Lady Dorrian said: “The statement made by JG to the appellant was made in the course of a conversation in which the appellant refers to disciplining the children to such an extent that JG required to intervene to stop him. This also accords with the evidence of A regarding JG, that ‘She tells ma dad to stop it.’ It would be open to the jury to treat the relevant parts of the conversation as criminative of the appellant having hit the children, including A.” 

She went on to say: “It is correct to say that the trial judge did not give specific directions in relation to the failure of the appellant to respond to what was said by JG. However that was not the real issue: the real issue, as his directions made clear, was whether the conversation provided corroborative support for the primary evidence.” 

Lady Dorrian concluded: “The trial judge directed the jury that the content of this, including to some extent what was said by JG, could provide independent corroboration. The jury were directed that it was a matter for them to determine the significance of what was said in the phone calls, and that the conversations had to be taken as a whole. The evidence of the conversation as a whole was clearly capable of providing support for the primary evidence in the case.” 

The appeal was therefore refused. 

Marc Weller: All to play for if Supreme Court takes indyref2 case

The draft contained the referendum question, established the modalities for the poll, and even provided for the font of the print on the ballot paper. In a surprise announcement, the First Minister also noted that the Lord Advocate was simultaneously referring the legality of the measure to the Supreme Court.

This, Ms Sturgeon explained, was evidence of the determination of the Scottish government to comply with the rule of law.

“Respect for the rule of law means that a referendum must be lawful,” she proclaimed, “an unlawful referendum would not be deliverable. Even if it was, it would lack effect. The outcome would not be recognised by the international community.”

This point is clearly correct. Some other states would be reluctant to recognise Scotland’s independence unless it is the outcome of a consensual process.

At present, five EU members are obstructing Kosovo’s bid to join until Belgrade has accepted its secession. They would do the same if London is not fully supportive of Scotland’s statehood.

The SNP’s frustration is understandable. For over a year, Edinburgh’s attempt to schedule a referendum has been denied by the government in London. Boris Johnson flatly refused to issue a so-called Section 30 Order, allowing the Scottish Parliament to act in relation to a matter reserved for Westminster, and his successor would likely do the same.

The 2012 Edinburgh Agreement resulted in a Section 30 Order ‘allowing’ the 2014 referendum. This might suggest that a permission of this kind is required before Holyrood can legislate. But the document clarifies that its purpose was merely to “put beyond doubt” such authority. Hence, the question of whether the Scottish Parliament can adopt referendum legislation in the absence of agreement from Westminster was left unresolved.

Ms Sturgeon has emphasised the poll will be merely consultative. It is only meant to “ascertain the views of the Scottish people for or against independence”. Moreover, the referendum result is not “self-executing”.

Hence, it is argued, any outcome would not immediately affect the UK constitution or the future of the Union, items reserved for the Westminster Parliament.

The opposing view would assert that the very purpose of the referendum is to impel the UK’s constitutional organs to implement the result. This was suggested by the text of the Edinburgh Agreement, which said the referendum would be “a decisive expression of the views of the people in Scotland and a result that everyone will respect”. Presumably “everyone” would include the government and other constitutional organs, which would be expected to implement the result.

The First Minister has insisted the new referendum will be exactly like its incarnation of 2014. Indeed, if the result favours independence, the SNP will presumably very much insist on implementing the will of the people thus made manifest. This would then quite clearly affect the UK’s constitutional order.

If the Supreme Court accepts the reference, the outcome is therefore in some doubt.

A ‘no’ from the court would end the prospect of a referendum, but it would not end the matter. The Scottish government has asserted that a negative result would merely prove that the Union is not an equal partnership, aiming to disenfranchise the people of Scotland. Should this happen, Ms Sturgeon has announced that the SNP will run in the next general election on a single issue – independence.

This would turn the elections into a quasi-referendum. If successful, the UK government would be obliged to take account of the will of the Scottish people expressed in this way, it is argued.

This second, tough-guy tactic rather undermines the assurance given by the First Minister that the Scottish government will stay within the law. In fact, that commitment seems to hold good only if the law delivers the result the SNP is seeking. The argument seems to be one of “if we lose on the issue of legality, we still win based on the principle of democracy”.

Such a strategy would allow Number 10 to assume the position of defending the rule of law, rather than appearing to frustrate a legitimate expression of the wishes of the Scottish people. Moreover, the Scottish government would give up the very principle of legality which it has claimed is necessary to persuade other states to recognise Scottish independence and to grant EU membership.

In addition, by launching its preemptive reference to the Supreme Court, Ms Sturgeon risks reducing judgment on her campaign for independence to a technical debate about process and legislative competence. The real question should be whether the UK government would be entitled to withhold its consent for a referendum, if this is in fact required at all.

As the 2014 poll made clear, the UK constitutional order accepts that Scotland is a self-determination unit that can decide to leave. This is in contrast to the constitution of Spain, which positively ruled out Catalonia’s attempted secession. If the people of Scotland enjoy the right to determine their future through an act of will, then the UK government should not be able to deny the means of making that will manifest.

There is no international rule which holds that a referendum of this kind can only happen once in a generation. Instead, a fresh referendum after the passage of a decade or so seems reasonable. In addition, Brexit has fundamentally changed the situation.

The hope must be that the sides will still be able to come to an Edinburgh Agreement 2.0, perhaps after the expected change of guard at Number 10. In the meantime, those supporting the Union might finally focus on devising an attractive formula for the future of Scotland in the UK that might be presented as an alternative to independence.

Marc Weller is professor of international law and international constitutional Studies at the University of Cambridge. This article first appeared in The Scotsman.

TLT announces record £144m revenue

Profit per equity partner has risen from £600,000 to £840,000.

TLT’s financial success throughout the year has been supported by the firm’s long-term shift in its working practices to create a fully flexible, progressive and inclusive working environment (TLT World). The initiative empowers employees to choose to work at a time and place that suits them, and is being supported by a multi-million pound investment in tech platforms and offices.

The new flexible approach to working has contributed to TLT bolstering diversity in senior roles. Partner promotions for 2021 / 2022 took TLT’s female partner representation to 31 per cent – up from 24 per cent in October 2019, when TLT first committed to a longer-term gender diversity target of 33 per cent female partners by 2025.

John Wood, managing partner at TLT, said: “Against the backdrop of the pandemic and more recent economic uncertainty in the UK, TLT has continued to grow at pace winning new clients, recruiting fantastic talent and leading the way in terms of wellbeing, environmental and social initiatives.

“These financial results have been achieved thanks to our dedicated strategy, which places the needs of our clients at the forefront. We work in step with our clients by listening to them, understanding their businesses and their needs, and providing effective legal solutions to their challenges. Given the ever-changing landscape of the environment businesses work in, it’s our role to be one step ahead and to prepare our clients for what comes next.

“We’ve continued to invest in our sectors, services and locations throughout the year with strategic hires, and most recently acquiring an office space in Glasgow’s most coveted sustainability office development, Cadworks. The firm has embraced a fully flexible approach to working, which has placed it in the top most progressive law firms in the country – an initiative that has been embraced by all colleagues and which has directly contributed to our financial success. Our results clearly show that the argument for a return to 9 to 5, 5 days a week in the office presenteeism to boost productivity is just wrong, flexible working works for both our people and our business.

“Hitting £144m turnover three years ahead of schedule is a remarkable achievement and an important milestone on our journey of growth and success, which continues apace. I’m really proud of the hard work and dedication of everyone at the firm, which has been instrumental in us achieving these record financial results. I look forward to seeing what we can achieve together in the year to come.”

Supply pressures in Scottish property market ease but demand remains strong

The newly-released Q2 Property Trends Report Scotland shows the property market is bouncing back to 2019 levels, with supply improving in June as listing volumes recovered – now four per cent above June 2019 figures – after tracking 10 per cent below 2019 levels for Q1 and early Q2.

The report, which uses Landmark’s data sources from across its businesses to reflect on cross-market activity during April, May and June of 2022, shows that supply is steadily improving, but demand variance is yet to stabilise.

The data also demonstrates greater buyer confidence in Scotland when compared to England and Wales, with listing to completion times much faster in Scotland than the rest of the UK.

Key findings from the report:

• Demand supply variance: Supply is steadily improving but demand variance remains ahead of trend. By June 2022, both listings and SSTM (Sold Subject to Missives) volumes topped June 2019 levels.
• Listings data relative to 2019: Listing volumes showed some recovery in June (4% above 2019 levels), after tracking 10% below 2019 levels for Q1 & early Q2.
• Completions: Completions in Q2 were lower than in Q1 during April and May but returned to 2019 levels in June with faster listing to completion times in Scotland vs England and Wales – now tracking more closely with SSTM.
• Registered Sales: Registered sales continue to show some volatility and out of season patterns, with levels in April similar to those of January 2022, but rising in May – showing some confidence in the market.

Landmark CEO, Simon Brown said: “As the Scottish property market starts to normalise following extended Covid restrictions, it is positive to see tentative signs of continued recovery for the market throughout Q2, with supply-side pressures beginning to ease.

“The data paints a positive picture of consumer confidence, with increasing listing volumes at one end of the transaction process tracking well against registered sales at the other end. However, true confidence will only come from consistency over consecutive months – with the cost of living and increased interest rates already starting to affect consumer confidence in England and Wales, this could yet present challenges.”

Amy Pairman: Construction contracts and the changes to time bar in Scotland

The general starting point is the same – if a claim has not been raised within five-years of the loss, injury or damage occurring then (unless one of the exceptions apply) the claim is extinguished.

From 1 June, however there is now:

• A new “knowledge test” which may delay when the five-year clock starts; and
• The ability to extend the five-year period by one year.

The new knowledge test

In Scotland, a number of court cases were leading to situations where the five-year clock was starting sooner than parties might have ordinarily thought.
The new knowledge test tries to address this, by requiring more than just objective knowledge of the occurrence of loss, which was what was previously needed. Instead, under the new test, the clock only starts when the party bringing the claim first became, or could with reasonable diligence have become, aware:

1. that the loss, injury or damage has occurred,
2. that that loss, injury or damage was caused by a person’s act or omission, and
3. the identity of that person.

The clock will not start until the party bringing the claim knew or ought to know all three facts. Whilst the hope is this will address the difficulties caused by the recent cases, a lot will depend on how the court applies the new test; and there is a risk it leaves the door open for the court to say a claim time barred earlier than a party might have thought.

It is also not clear what extra benefit the new test will bring in construction cases. The party who caused the loss will usually be easily identified as one of the parties to the construction contract(s); and a defect/failure will usually be due to an act or omission in either the design or construction. In a traditional contract set up, there may be more leeway as it may not be clear whether the loss was caused by design or construction – but in a design and build contract, that is unlikely to be the case. Which again means much will depend on how the courts approach it.

Contracting out

While parties in England have used standstill agreements for many years, there was no equivalent in Scotland. That has now changed – but the new position in Scotland is different.

Unlike in England, the clock in Scotland is not paused; instead, parties are restricted to agreeing a one-year extension. However, that extension can only be agreed after the clock has started, but before the five-year period has ended.

In many cases this will lead to the difficult (and often contentious) question of determining when the five-years started, and so when it finishes. The risk being, if the clock started earlier than the parties thought, they might inadvertently extend the period by more than a year, risking the agreement being invalid and/or leaving the defender facing a claim they might have been able to avoid.

To get around this, parties may simply agree to apply a six rather than a five-year clock, without identifying specific dates; but that will still leave uncertainty, meaning a claim may need to be raised anyway, to protect the position.

This means that, until an industry consensus is reached, it is going to be very difficult to agree the terms of any extension.

Impact on subcontracts

Main contractors will also need to think about how these changes could impact the position down-the-line, as a different clock could apply to claims they have against a subcontractor or consultant.

This is because the date of a main contractor’s awareness of the facts under the new knowledge test, may be different to the date their employer will be said to have that knowledge in any claim against them. Likewise, any agreed extension between the main contractor and the employer, will not bind subcontractors– that would need to be negotiated separately. The risk being, main contractors could find themselves facing a claim, but being unable to pass that claim down the line.

Takeaways

The changes in Scotland are a step in the right direction and, based on the court’s interpretation, they could lead to later start dates for claims. The key points for now being:

1. Claims under construction contracts may now time bar later, but there is still a risk that, even with the new knowledge test, the Court may say the claim time barred earlier than a party thought.
2. It is now possible to agree to contractually extend the 5-year time limit by a year, but agreeing terms may be difficult and always consider how it may impact claims down the line.

Amy Pairman is an associate at Brodies LLP

Continued recognition for Brodies in Chambers UK High Net Worth Guide

The firm has maintained its band 1 rankings for private wealth law services in Aberdeen, Glasgow and Edinburgh, and has again held its band 4 UK ranking for family/matrimonial law – one of only two law firms in Scotland to be included in the list.

The Chambers UK High Net Worth Guide – which bases its rankings on detailed research into firms and lawyers, and feedback from clients and legal peers – also ranks Brodies band 1 for its expertise in private wealth law as a national leader outside London and recognises seven of its personal and family lawyers in the individual rankings.

Mark Stewart, partner and head of personal and family at Brodies, said: “These latest rankings demonstrate our colleagues’ commitment to providing a high-quality service to our clients, often at a time of particular sensitivity or complexity in their own lives.

“In the last 12 months, the practice has continued to evolve. Following the promotion of Sarah Lilley and Susie Mountain to partner, we were also delighted to welcome our new partner, Jacqueline Stroud, to the firm earlier this year.

“Alongside, Susie becoming a solicitor advocate, and an additional six accreditations being awarded to colleagues in the practice, this underpins our continued focus on delivering a comprehensive service across Scotland.”

Partner Shaun George, who leads the family practice, added: “We continue to develop and expand our team for the future, whilst looking to the challenges and circumstances facing our clients today. Our lawyers have worked closely with our clients over the last year, navigating what are often unique circumstances. We are proud that we continue to provide specialist and cost-effective advice to all those with whom we work, across the length and breadth of Scotland.”

CJEU: Denmark falls foul of PDO rules with cheese exports

The name ‘Feta’ was registered as a protected designation of origin (PDO) in 2002. Since then, that name may be used only for cheese that originates in the defined geographical area in Greece and conforms to the applicable product specification.

In the present infringement proceedings, the Commission, supported by Greece and Cyprus, claims that Denmark has breached its obligations under Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 2 by failing to prevent or stop the use of the designation ‘Feta’ on cheese produced in Denmark and intended for export to third countries.

Denmark, however, maintains that Regulation No 1151/2012 applies only to products sold in the European Union and does not cover exports to third countries. It therefore does not deny that it has neither prevented nor stopped producers in its territory from using the name ‘Feta’ if their products are intended for export to third countries.

In its judgment, the Court of Justice notes in the first place that, according to the wording of Regulation No 1151/2012, the use of a registered name to designate products not covered by the registration which are produced in the European Union and intended for export to third countries is not excluded from the prohibition laid down in that regulation.

As regards, in the second place, the context of Regulation No 1151/2012, the court points out that PDOs and protected geographical indications (PGIs) are protected as an intellectual property right by Regulation No 1151/2012. The scheme for PDOs and PGIs has been established in order to help producers of products linked to a geographical area by ensuring uniform protection of the names as an intellectual property right in the territory of the European Union. The use of a PDO or PGI to designate a product produced in the territory of the European Union which does not comply with the applicable product specification impairs, within the European Union, the intellectual property right constituted by that PDO or PGI, even if that product is intended for export to third countries.

In the third place, regarding the objectives pursued by Regulation No 1151/2012, the court states that the objective of PDOs and PGIs is to help producers of products linked to a geographical area by securing fair returns for the qualities of their products, by ensuring uniform protection of the names as an intellectual property right in the territory of the European Union, and by providing clear information on the value-adding attributes of the product to consumers. The use of the PDO ‘Feta’ to designate products produced in the territory of the European Union which do not comply with the product specification for that PDO undermines those objectives, even if those products are intended for export to third countries.

It therefore follows from the wording of Regulation No 1151/2012, as well as from its context and the objectives pursued by it, that such use constitutes conduct prohibited by that regulation. The court concludes that, by failing to prevent or stop such use in its territory, Denmark has failed to fulfil its obligations under Regulation No 1151/2012.

In response to the second complaint raised by the Commission, the court considers that Denmark has not infringed its obligation under the principle of sincere cooperation referred to in Article 4(3) TEU. That complaint refers to the same conduct as that which forms the subject matter of the first complaint, namely the failure to prevent or stop Danish producers from using the PDO ‘Feta’ to designate cheese which does not comply with the applicable product specification.

Although it is true that the export to third countries by EU producers of products unlawfully using a PDO is likely to weaken the European Union’s position in international negotiations aimed at ensuring the protection of EU quality schemes, it has not been established that Denmark has taken any action or made any statements potentially having that effect, which would constitute conduct distinct from that which forms the subject matter of the first complaint.

New study to analyse impact of post-Brexit visas

The research aims to show more about living and working conditions of those who arrive in Britain to work on farms and with the elderly.

The project is among the first studies to be undertaken in the context of the new migration regimes following the end of free movement between the UK and the EU. It aims to analyse the effects of the visa conditions attached to short-term migration schemes on people’s vulnerability to exploitation. This includes access to protective labour market structures, such as union membership, and statutory enforcement and redress, for example through employment tribunals, and whether it creates vulnerability to exploitation.

The Seasonal Worker Visa (SWV) allows workers from a range of countries to enter the UK to work in agriculture for periods less than six months and limiting their right to change employers. A Health and Care Worker visa allows medical professionals to come to or stay in the UK to do an eligible job with the NHS or in adult social care.

Researchers will discover more about the working conditions of agricultural and care workers by engaging support workers in charities and NGOs to conduct interviews.

Dr Inga Thiemann, lecturer in law at the University of Exeter, who is leading the project, said: “We want to centre migrant workers’ own voices and their lived experience in these sectors. We want to find out how they view their working conditions and which support they think would be useful to them. We feel it is important to base policy suggestions on that lived experience.”

The research project is led by the University of Exeter, in partnership with the University of Bristol, the University of York, and the University of Durham, as well as NGOs Focus on Labour Exploitation (FLEX) and the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI), with support from UNISON. It is hoped the findings will be used by policymakers in the future.

The team and their frontline NGO partners will conduct a survey and in-depth qualitative interviews and focus groups with migrant workers and their representative organisations on their experience of work, their bargaining power and access to protective mechanisms, as well as what they would like enforcement mechanisms to look like.

The researchers will also carry out desk-based research on ongoing changes to the labour market and new visa regimes prompted by Brexit, Covid-19 and recent legislative initiatives.

Dr Thiemann said: “There is growing evidence that both insecure visa regimes and insufficient labour protections contribute to migrant workers’ vulnerabilities to exploitation, discrimination and modern slavery. This project will investigate the specific vulnerabilities experienced by migrant agriculture and care workers on the new post-Brexit visa regimes.

“This project will actively engage migrant workers as co-creators of the research and collaboratively generate new data on their working conditions, experiences and risks of exploitation and access to protections and redress. It will also assess the suitability of the relevant laws and enforcement mechanisms to adequately protect workers.”

Man wrongly convicted of killing Malcolm X to sue authorities for $40m

Muhammad Aziz was arrested along with Khalil Islam after the civil rights leader was shot dead at the Audubon Ballroom in Manhattan on 21 February 1965.

They were sentenced to life in prison the following year. Both of them denied ever having been in the ballroom.

Their convictions were overturned 55 years later after a documentary called Who Killed Malcolm X? detailed flaws in the case against them and suggested that the real killer was William Bradley, another member of the Nation of Islam, who died in 2018.

A 22-month investigation thereafter found that evidence that could have cleared the two was withheld by the FBI and the New York police.

Mr Aziz and his lawyers had begun negotiating with the city for a settlement, but the talks broke down.

Now 84, Mr Aziz was “a US Navy veteran who served multiple tours of duty and the father of six young children” and he “was only 26 years old when he was arrested for the murder of Malcolm X”, his lawyers state in the suit. “He spent 20 years, during what should have been the prime of his life, locked in prison for a crime he did not commit. The damage done to Mr Aziz and his family was immense and irreparable.”

Eric Adams, New York’s mayor, said that the city would review the suit. He said he believed “as someone who has fought for a fairer criminal justice system for my entire career” that overturning the convictions of the two men had been “the just outcome”.

Employers urged to be mindful of workers rights ahead of heatwave

BTO lends Cyrenians a helping hand

Cyrenians is a charity aimed at tackling the causes and consequences of homelessness.

Shelagh Fairbairn, Debbie Reekie, Will Cole, Sandra Jurak and Farhana Apon Dinca had a fun morning assisting with picking and packing orders as part of the charity’s Good Food projects.

The depot is operated by a dedicated group of volunteers, including one with over 20 years’ service, supported by a small number of staff. The BTO team heard inspiring stories of volunteers whose work at the project had helped them to rebuild their confidence after traumatic events, and who had then been able to return to paid employment.

The food stock comes in from supermarkets and other suppliers. Local charities and projects are able to submit orders online from whatever happens to be available.

Will Cole, dispute resolution partner, said: “I really enjoyed the opportunity to work with BTO colleagues doing something different from our usual day-to-day work. We were all focussed on the challenge of getting the picking and sorting of the different items exactly right and I think by the end we were getting pretty efficient. It was satisfying seeing the labels going on the stacks of goods we had made up, marking them as destined for various worthy projects across the Lothians.”

Farhana Apon Dinca, office services manager in BTO’s Edinburgh office, commented: “I think we don’t realise how much good food is being put to waste, due to the commercialism of how food should look. My takeaway was that food is our basic necessity and we should treat it with respect and not waste it.”

Shelagh Fairbairn, legal secretary, added: “It was a really different and fun experience for me. Sam, our host, was very welcoming and friendly, as was every volunteer we had the pleasure of meeting and working with.

“I think we worked incredibly well as a team. What gratified me personally was seeing perfectly good food go to good causes. Even the stuff that becomes unfit for human consumption then goes off to a bird sanctuary with which Cyrenians is affiliated, so absolutely nothing goes to waste.”

Rights watch

Experts document alleged crimes against humanity committed by Russian forces in Ukraine

A new report from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe found that patterns of violent acts by Russian forces in Ukraine meet the qualification of crimes against humanity, detailing horrific actions by Russian forces including the discovery of torture chambers at a summer camp in Bucha.

China leader Xi visits Xinjiang amid human rights concerns

Chinese leader Xi Jinping visited the northwestern Xinjiang region this week amid concerns over China’s detention of a million or more members of primarily Muslim ethnic native minorities.

Russia: Human rights experts condemn civil society shutdown

Top UN-appointed independent rights experts have condemned Russia’s “continued and heightened crackdown on civil society groups, human rights defenders and media outlets”.

US looking at new international body to record rights abuses in Yemen

The Biden administration is exploring the creation of a new international committee to document and report on human rights violations in Yemen, months after a Saudi lobbying campaign quashed an independent United Nations investigation into possible war crimes.

Facebook Accused of ‘Whitewashing’ Long-Awaited Human Rights Report on India

Facebook’s parent company Meta has been accused of “whitewashing” a long-awaited report on its human rights impact in India, which the company released in a highly summarized form on Thursday, drawing fire from civil society groups.

Baloch activists plan to make Pak accountable for human rights violations in Balochistan

A number of Baloch activists gathered at the event, hosted by Baroness Natalie Bennett, Member of House of Lords at British Parliament on Tuesday to carry out the campaign to make Pakistan accountable for human rights violations in Balochistan.

Council of Europe urges Spain to ensure humane border control policies with Morocco

The Council of Europe’s Human Rights Commission has called on Spain to ensure humane border control measures are conducted which do not lead to rights violations, after dozens of migrants died last month while trying to scale a border fence between Morocco and the Spanish enclave of Melilla, Anadolu News Agency reports.

Analysis: Italy sharpens “guillotine” to cut Europe’s slowest trials

Roberto Bachis, a 58-year-old Italian accountant, was acquitted of two charges of fraud in 2019 after 11 years of trials and investigations which ruined his health, his finances and his marriage.

Joe Biden defends human rights record ahead of Saudi visit

Joe Biden has defended his imminent trip to Saudi Arabia, saying he will not avoid human rights issues on the final leg of his Middle East tour, despite refusing to commit to mentioning the murder of the dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi when he meets the kingdom’s crown prince.

Nintendo Japan officially provides spousal benefits to same-sex partnerships

It’s been slow moving, but bit-by-bit regions of Japan have been moving to recognize same-sex marriages here and there. However, there is still a lot of progress needed in that area, so much so that corporations have begun taking the initiative and allowing their employees to enjoy the same benefits as conventionally married couples regardless of their own sexual orientation or gender identity.

Quote of the day

The only political ism surviving in full strength from the past is nationalism. This was partly to be expected from the liberation of so many colonies simultaneously, beginning in the 1920s. But this nationalism differs from the old in two remarkable ways: it is not patriotic and it does not want to absorb and assimilate. On the contrary, it wants to shrink and secede, to limit its control to its one small group of like-minded-we-ourselves-alone. It is in that sense racist, particularist, sectarian, minority-inspired.

Jacques Barzun

And finally… calling card

Wayne Sullivan, 38, was caught three days after raiding a shop when he claimed a €5,000 prize three days later, the Irish Independent reports.

He used a plastic gun, described as looking like a “child’s toy”, to rob the shop of scratch cards and a small amount of cash.

Mr Sullivan was successful in claiming the €5,000, but gardaí subsequently traced the winning card and found he had written his name and address on the back.

An officer told Dublin Circuit Criminal Court that he “wouldn’t rate Sullivan high on the list of criminal intelligentsia”.

Mr Sullivan was jailed for 18 months with the final year suspended.