A great article & a good piece of advice from a competent person with years of experience in the legal sphere.
However, a majority of people in the West will start saying that how a court can pass a judgement when the witness is hidden behind a piece of cloth. Heck, in Canada, the current government of Mr. Harper & Co. have already brought a piece of legislation in the parliament, to ban veil in citizenship oath ceremonies, just so the judges can see that everyone is actually reading the oath. What's next? Keeping tabs on all immigrants, to see if they do really love their country & are loyal to it (sort of like North Korea).
If loyalty is to be measured by actually reading the oath, then what about all those rich Canadian business elites who stash their billions in offshore havens, & avoid paying taxes like the plague, but still use all the amenities of being a Canadian citizen. Are they loyal Canadians? Anyway, I digress.
So, on one end, public complains that people who have years of relevant experiences (to the given subject) & competencies should make such calls. When one makes such a call, then they decry why he/she is saying such things. So, the public will be happy as long as the person, saying something important in public sphere, merely confirm their biases. Anything other than that is a blight on that person's competencies.
One other common comment, which really rile me up, in such situation is said by the common public, is why don't these immigrants go back to their own countries, if they wanted to keep following their native country's cultures & norms. Good question.
My answer is no immigrant want to leave their beloved country & start a whole new life in another country, especially, since, their adopted country don't even accept them as full citizens. Developed countries stop interfering, politically & militarily, in developing countries' affairs & let them sink or swim. A majority of immigrants will stop migrating themselves.
After all, UN was made to end international wars & bring peace around the world. Well, the world history of the past 60 years has shown something else ... there are now more displaced people than ever & human suffering around the world has only increased in the past 60 years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judges must show respect to women who choose to keep their faces covered due to their religious beliefs, the UK’s most senior judge has said.
Lord Neuberger said judges must have “an understanding of different cultural & social habits” in their bid to show fairness to those involved in trials.
Addressing the Criminal Justice Alliance, the supreme court president said: “It is necessary to have some understanding as to how people from different cultural, social, religious or other backgrounds think & behave & how they expect others to behave.
“Well-known examples include how some religions consider it inappropriate to take the oath, how some people consider it rude to look other people in the eye, how some women find it inappropriate to appear in public with their face uncovered, & how some people deem it inappropriate to confront others or to be confronted - for instance with an outright denial.”
In 2014 Judge Peter Murphy upheld a ruling allowing Muslim woman Rebekah Dawson to stand trial wearing a full-face veil.
The 22-year-old waived her right to give evidence in her defence, however, after it was ruled that she would have to remove the niqab, which made only her eyes visible, if she took the stand.
She later admitted witness intimidation after denying the charge during a seven-day trial.
In a lengthy speech entitled “Fairness in the courts: the best we can do”, Neuberger accepted that judges tended to come from privileged backgrounds & warned of the dangers of this. “A white male public school judge presiding in a trial of an unemployed traveller from eastern Europe accused of assaulting or robbing a white female public school woman will, I hope, always be unbiased,” he said.
“However he should always think to himself what his subconscious may be thinking or how it may be causing him to act; & he should always remember how things may look to the defendant, & indeed to the jury & to the public generally.”
Neuberger said judges & lawyers should always keep in mind how “intimidating” the court process could be for those involved in trials, including “the parties, their families, the victims, the witnesses & the jurors”.
Speaking in the context of legal aid cuts, he said ensuring all parties involved in a case understood the goings-on in a court had become more important because “people are having to choose between representing themselves or not getting justice at all”.
However, a majority of people in the West will start saying that how a court can pass a judgement when the witness is hidden behind a piece of cloth. Heck, in Canada, the current government of Mr. Harper & Co. have already brought a piece of legislation in the parliament, to ban veil in citizenship oath ceremonies, just so the judges can see that everyone is actually reading the oath. What's next? Keeping tabs on all immigrants, to see if they do really love their country & are loyal to it (sort of like North Korea).
If loyalty is to be measured by actually reading the oath, then what about all those rich Canadian business elites who stash their billions in offshore havens, & avoid paying taxes like the plague, but still use all the amenities of being a Canadian citizen. Are they loyal Canadians? Anyway, I digress.
So, on one end, public complains that people who have years of relevant experiences (to the given subject) & competencies should make such calls. When one makes such a call, then they decry why he/she is saying such things. So, the public will be happy as long as the person, saying something important in public sphere, merely confirm their biases. Anything other than that is a blight on that person's competencies.
One other common comment, which really rile me up, in such situation is said by the common public, is why don't these immigrants go back to their own countries, if they wanted to keep following their native country's cultures & norms. Good question.
My answer is no immigrant want to leave their beloved country & start a whole new life in another country, especially, since, their adopted country don't even accept them as full citizens. Developed countries stop interfering, politically & militarily, in developing countries' affairs & let them sink or swim. A majority of immigrants will stop migrating themselves.
After all, UN was made to end international wars & bring peace around the world. Well, the world history of the past 60 years has shown something else ... there are now more displaced people than ever & human suffering around the world has only increased in the past 60 years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judges must show respect to women who choose to keep their faces covered due to their religious beliefs, the UK’s most senior judge has said.
Lord Neuberger said judges must have “an understanding of different cultural & social habits” in their bid to show fairness to those involved in trials.
Addressing the Criminal Justice Alliance, the supreme court president said: “It is necessary to have some understanding as to how people from different cultural, social, religious or other backgrounds think & behave & how they expect others to behave.
“Well-known examples include how some religions consider it inappropriate to take the oath, how some people consider it rude to look other people in the eye, how some women find it inappropriate to appear in public with their face uncovered, & how some people deem it inappropriate to confront others or to be confronted - for instance with an outright denial.”
In 2014 Judge Peter Murphy upheld a ruling allowing Muslim woman Rebekah Dawson to stand trial wearing a full-face veil.
The 22-year-old waived her right to give evidence in her defence, however, after it was ruled that she would have to remove the niqab, which made only her eyes visible, if she took the stand.
She later admitted witness intimidation after denying the charge during a seven-day trial.
In a lengthy speech entitled “Fairness in the courts: the best we can do”, Neuberger accepted that judges tended to come from privileged backgrounds & warned of the dangers of this. “A white male public school judge presiding in a trial of an unemployed traveller from eastern Europe accused of assaulting or robbing a white female public school woman will, I hope, always be unbiased,” he said.
“However he should always think to himself what his subconscious may be thinking or how it may be causing him to act; & he should always remember how things may look to the defendant, & indeed to the jury & to the public generally.”
Neuberger said judges & lawyers should always keep in mind how “intimidating” the court process could be for those involved in trials, including “the parties, their families, the victims, the witnesses & the jurors”.
Speaking in the context of legal aid cuts, he said ensuring all parties involved in a case understood the goings-on in a court had become more important because “people are having to choose between representing themselves or not getting justice at all”.
No comments:
Post a Comment