Lmst

The only rapist to appeal Gisèle Pelicot charge is handed longer jail term

https://fed.brid.gy/r/https://metro.co.uk/2025/10/09/rapist-appeal-gisele-pelicot-charge-handed-longer-jail-term-24386221/

Video ~ Appeal Court Declares Passed Rivers 2024 Budget Illegal

Appeal Court Declares Passed Rivers 2024 Budget Illegal #Issues #Amaewhule #AppealCourt #budget #Edison #Ehie #Fubara #James #Martin #Nyesom #Omotoso #Rivers #Siminalayi #Wike ©October 11th, 2024 ®October 11, 2024 Appeal Court of Justice in Nigeria has affirmed the decision of lower court and declared the ₦800 billion 2024 Financial year budget of Rivers State illegal and unconstitutional #OsazuwaAkonedo

https://osazuwaakonedo.news/video-appeal-court-declares-passed-rivers-2024-budget-illegal/09/10/2025/

Appeal case – arms to Israel

Update on the case from Amnesty and Human Rights Watch

May 2025

Amnesty has issued an update on this case which is currently before the Appeal Court. There is a video clip attached.

See also a post from Human Rights Watch;

“How could they have allowed that to happen? This is the question everyone asks, years later, when looking back at mass atrocity crimes in the past. Everything’s so clear when it’s described in history books – war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide…

It’s not that these things aren’t clear at the time exactly. In fact, in recent decades, they have often been well-documented in excruciating detail more or less as they happen. Yet, somehow, when these things are unfolding in real time, some folks seem unable – maybe, more often, unwilling – to accept the evidence of their eyes and ears. Various considerations distract international leaders in particular: prejudices, alliances, politics…

There can never be any justification for the worst kinds of crimes known to humanity, but that doesn’t keep leaders from trying to offer some. And with that, you move toward the future answer to the future question: The world at the time had leaders who refused to take a stand and defend humanity when it mattered most.

Today, everyone can see Israel has been committing atrocities in Gaza during hostilities since October 7, 2023. We’ve seen systematic destruction of homes, apartment buildings, orchards and fields, schools, hospitals, and water and sanitation facilities. Israel has also openly used starvation as a weapon of war.

These actions amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity including extermination, and acts of genocide. Now, the Israeli government’s latest plan has made its intentions even clearer. They want to demolish what remains of Gaza’s civilian infrastructure and concentrate the Palestinian population (about 2 million people) into one tiny area.

Israeli government ministers couldn’t make things any more obvious. They say Israel is “finally going to conquer the Gaza Strip.” They threaten that Gaza will be “completely destroyed” and say its Palestinian population will “leave in great numbers to third countries.”

Some Israeli officials say the Palestinian exodus will be “voluntary.” However, it’s hard to call it voluntary, when Israel has deliberately destroyed the area’s ability to sustain human life.

If implemented, the plan would amount to an abhorrent escalation of extermination. In fact, Israel’s plan is so obviously extreme and has been made so extremely obvious, it should trigger international action under the Genocide Convention’s “duty to prevent.”

The 1948 Genocide Convention is an international agreement that embodies the spirit of “never again.” It says a “duty to prevent” genocide arises as soon as a state learns, or should normally have learned, of a serious risk that genocide may be committed. One hundred and fifty-three countries have signed up to the Convention. These include the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany.

Yet, these are some of the very countries that have been supporting the government of Israel most throughout its carnage in Gaza, not least by continuing to provide Israel with weapons even after the atrocities were undeniable.

Israel’s latest plan should finally, at long last, shake London, Brussels, Berlin, Paris, and Washington to their core. It should make them see beyond everyday politics, to their responsibility to humanity and history – and to their legal obligation to act.

Without that, the question one day may indeed be, “How could they have allowed that to happen?” And everyone will know the answer.” Human Rights Watch

May 15th

#AppealCourt #armsSales #Gaza #government #Israel

Anti-protest law modified

High Court loosens restrictions on demonstrations

May 2025

No government likes protests. They demonstrate, all too visibly, that the public – or a part of them at least – is not happy with them or the status quo. Depending on the degree of despotism, demonstrations are controlled or in the worst of countries, banned altogether. China has an extremely restrictive policy backed up by a massive and all pervasive surveillance system making protests all but impossible. Gulf states are also highly restrictive.

Demonstrations are often how change happens. Britain has many examples throughout its history of protest bringing change. Wat Tyler and the plight of the poor (serfs); the Poll Tax riots in 1381 and 1970; the Prayer Book rebellion; the Iraq War protest and of course the Suffragettes. There are many more examples. They do not necessarily bring about immediate change. They do show to politicians and others the depth of feeling that people have about their cause.

The last Conservative government was no different to others in disliking protests. What upset them the most were the climate protests. Just Stop Oil and other groups such as Extinction Rebellion, engaged in a series of eye-catching protests which shone a light on the government’s failure (in their eyes) to do enough to stop fossil fuel extraction.

Suella Braverman, then the Home Secretary resented these protests and introduced the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act in 2022 in an attempt to seriously curtail them. Controversially they introduced a change in the threshold wording from ‘serious disruption’ to ‘more than minor’. This was done by using a statutory instrument not after proper debate in the House of Commons. This had the effect of almost banning all protests.

Successful challenge

Liberty and other groups successfully challenged this in the courts and the new Labour government decided to appeal. This seems to demonstrate that the dislike of protest is not a party political matter: governments just do not like challenge. Last week (May 2) the Appeal Court ruled that ‘serious’ is not ‘more than minor’ and said that the anti-protest laws were introduced unlawfully. The regulations gave police almost unlimited powers to prevent protests taking place. Many were arrested using these powers.

The protests which so upset the previous government concerned fossil fuels. The fossil fuel industry is extremely powerful and well-funded. Several of the various think tanks based in and around 55 Tufton Street are thought to be funded by them. These include: The Tax Payers Alliance; Civitas; Adam Smith Institute; Global Warming Policy Foundation; Centre for Policy Studies and the Institute of Economic Affairs. Their funding is opaque but is thought to be mainly from fossil fuel companies such as the Koch corporation in the USA among others. They have frequent access to the media being interviewed on various BBC and commercial stations without ever being asked ‘who funds you?’ Their opinions often appear in newspaper columns. They employ large numbers of lobbyists and enjoy close contact with ministers and civil servants. They claim to be influential in forming policies to suit their interests. It was admitted by Rishi Sunak when he was prime minister that the Policy Exchange – another of these think tanks funded by Exxon Mobil – had drafted the anti-protest legislation.

Protest is crucial to enable the ordinary person to make their voice heard. As with the arms industry we highlighted in a previous post, governments are dominated by commercial concerns, the need for growth and the enormous power and influence of companies and their army of lobbyists. Around £2bn per annum is spent by firms on this activity. It is welcome news that the Appeal Court has ruled against the government and its ‘draconian’ anti-protest legislation.

#AppealCourt #Braverman #fossilFuel #protest #thinkTanks

Trump loses as US Appeal Court affirms injunction against birthright order: President Donald Trump’s ongoing attempts to limit automatic birthright citizenship across the United States as part of his strict stance on immigration faced another setback on Friday. A second federal appeals court declined to overturn a court order blocking the President’s executive order. The 4th US Circuit Court of… https://creebhills.com/2025/02/trump-loses-as-us-court-affirms-injunction?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon #Trump #BirthrightCitizenship #ImmigrationReform #USCourt #AppealCourt

Corriere.it - Homepage by di Roberta Polese
Crac con soldi dei calciatori: «Da Montolivo a Toni, affari e flop tra castelli e resort»

La Cassazione ha rigettato il ricorso, per gli amministratori della Prestige srl è stata confermata la pena di cinque anni decisa in Appello

Translated:
Deals with footballers' money: "From Montolivo to Toni, business and flops between castles and resorts".

The Supreme Court of Cassation has rejected the appeal. For the administrators of Prestige srl, the five-year sentence decided by the Appeal Court was confirmed.

#Prestigesrl #AppealCourt #Toni #Montolivo
https://www.corriere.it