European Court Upholds French Full Veil Ban

There are calls beyond France too for public wearing of the
niqab to be banned

BBC: The European Court of Human Rights has upheld a ban by France on wearing the Muslim full-face veil - the niqab.

A case was brought by a 24-year-old French woman, who argued that the ban on wearing the veil in public violated her freedom of religion and expression.

French law says nobody can wear in a public space clothing intended to conceal the face. The penalty for doing so can be a 150-euro fine (£120; $205).

The 2010 law came in under former conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy.

A breach of the ban can also mean a wearer having to undergo citizenship instruction. » | Tuesday, July 01, 2014

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS: French ban on the wearing in public of clothing designed to conceal one’s face does not breach the Convention »

Unbelievable! European Court Backs Immunity for Saudi Arabian Officials Accused of Torture

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: European human rights judges uphold the immunity of Saudi Arabian officials accused of torturing Britons

Saudi Arabian officials have immunity in Britain's courts from being sued over the alleged torture of British nationals including rape, European human rights judges have ruled.

The European Court of Human Rights has upheld a judicial ruling in the House of Lords that stopped four Britons from taking legal action against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Ron Jones, Alexander Mitchell, Leslie Walker and William Sampson claimed they were subjected to torture following their arrest after a series of terrorist bombings carried out by opposition groups in 2001 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia's capital city.

The four Britons confessed to acting as spies under orders from the British government, and were convicted in closed court without legal representation.

The men claimed that they were subjected to beatings, sleep deprivation and anal rape as well as being given mind-altering drugs during their time in custody and have to pursue Saudi Arabian officials, their alleged torturers, in the British courts. Mr Sampson has since died. » | Bruno Waterfield, Brussels | Tuesday, January 14, 2014

Senior Judge Warns Over Deportation of Terror Suspects to Torture States
THE GUARDIAN: Britain's most senior judge Lord Neuberger says policy would mean pulling out of UN and European court of human rights

Britain will have to withdraw from the United Nations as well as the European court of human rights if it wants to deport terrorist suspects to states that carry out torture, the country's most senior judge has warned.

In his first interview since becoming president of the supreme court, Lord Neuberger launched a sustained attack on "slanted" coverage and "one-sided" portrayals that misrepresent the way the human rights court operates.

The UK's supreme court is "not subservient" but works "in a dialogue" with the judges in Strasbourg, he insisted. Pulling out of the Council of Europe body – which the home secretary, Theresa May, and the justice secretary, Chris Grayling, both contemplate – would "certainly send an unfortunate number of messages", Neuberger added.

The judge's comments, timed for publication on Tuesday, were made before the two ministers' views were published in Sunday papers. Neuberger also talked about the lack of diversity in the upper reaches of the judiciary, suggesting that appointment panels could be suffering from a "subconscious bias" against women.

"Human rights excite great emotion," the 65-year-old judge said. "The concerns that people have about human rights are, generally speaking, exaggerated … [although] sometimes courts get it wrong. » | Owen Bowcott, legal affairs correspondent | Tuesday, March 05, 2013

GUARDIAN EDITORAL: Human rights laws: supremely serious judgment: The Tories are living in a fantasy land if they think lawmaking in their Little England could ignore international human rights » | Tuesday, March 05, 2013

Christian Wins Right to Wear Cross at Work
THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: A Christian airline check-in clerk has won the right to wear a cross at work in a landmark case set to define religious freedom in Britain and across Europe.

The European Court of Human Rights ruled that the UK had failed to protect Nadia Eweida's freedom to manifest her faith in the workplace.

But it rejected a similar legal challenge from Shirley Chaplin, a nurse, ruling that the hospital where she worked should be able to refuse permission to wear a cross on “health and safety” grounds.

Both women lost employment tribunal cases in Britain after being refused the right to wear a cross as a symbol of their faith under their employers' uniform policy.

And in a hearing in Strasbourg last year the UK Government argued that this was not a breach of their human rights and wearing a cross is not an essential tenet of Christianity. But in its judgment the court said that manifesting religion is a "fundamental right".

It added: "[This is because] a healthy democratic society needs to tolerate and sustain pluralism and diversity; but also because of the value to an individual who has made religion a central tenet of his or her life to be able to communicate that belief to others."

The ruling in favour of Mrs Eweida represents a humiliation for David Cameron who promised to change the law to enshrine workers' right to wear the cross – even as lawyers for his Government were actively fighting the women in court.

It led to accusations of hypocrisy.

But, in a decision which could have even wider long-term implications, the court also rejected parallel challenges brought by two other Christians who lost their jobs for taking a stand on what they saw as a matter of conscience. » | John Bingham, Religious Affairs Editor | Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Christians Should 'Leave Their Beliefs At Home or Get Another Job'
THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: Christians should leave their religious beliefs at home or accept that a personal expression of faith at work, such as wearing a cross, means they might have to resign and get another job, government lawyers have said.

Landmark cases, brought by four British Christians, including two workers forced out of their jobs after visibly wearing crosses, have been heard today at the European Court of Human Rights

David Cameron, the Prime Minister, has previously pledged to change the law to protect religious expression at work but official legal submissions on Tuesday to Strasbourg human rights judges made a clear “difference between the professional and private sphere”.

James Eadie QC, acting for the government, told the European court that the refusal to allow an NHS nurse and a British Airways worker to visibly wear a crucifix at work “did not prevent either of them practicing religion in private”, which would be protected by human rights law.

He argued that that a Christian, or any other religious believer, “under difficulty” is not discriminated against if the choice of “resigning and moving to a different job” is not blocked.

“The option remains open to them,” he said.

Government lawyers also told the Strasbourg court that wearing a cross is not a “generally recognised” act of Christian worship and is not required by scripture. » | Bruno Waterfield, Strasbourg | Tuesday, September 04, 2012

UK Government to Press for European Court Reform
BBC: The government is to press for the European Court of Human Rights to be reformed, says the justice secretary.


Ken Clarke said the government would press for changes to the way the court operated when the UK takes over the chairmanship of the Council of Europe.

Speaking on the Andrew Marr show, he said the European Convention of Human Rights would continue to be adhered to.

Last week it was announced that a commission would be set up to examine a possible British Bill of Rights.

The commission, which will be jointly chaired by Mr Clarke and Deputy Leader Nick Clegg, will look at whether the UK Bill of Rights could overrule the European Convention of Human Rights.

"The government's policy is to investigate a case for a British Bill of Rights and whether that could improve the relationship between Strasbourg and here," said Mr Clarke. >>> | Sunday, February 20, 2011

European Court Fines Russia for Banning Gay Parades
BBC: The European Court of Human Rights has fined Russia for banning gay parades in Moscow, in an important victory for the country's gay community.

A leading activist, Nikolai Alexeyev, brought the case after the city authorities repeatedly rejected his requests to organise marches.

The Moscow authorities had argued the parades would cause a violent reaction.

But the court in Strasbourg said Russia had discriminated against Mr Alexeyev on grounds of sexual orientation.

It said that by refusing to allow the parades, the authorities had "effectively approved of and supported groups who had called for (their) disruption".

"The mere risk of a demonstration creating a disturbance was not sufficient to justify its ban," the court said.

It ordered Russia to pay Mr Alexeyev 29,510 euros ($41,090) in damages and for legal fees.

"This is a crippling blow to Russian homophobia on all accounts," Mr Alexeyev said after the verdict was announced.

"The authorities now have to ensure the security of peaceful gay activists, and must allow our protests to take place in Moscow or any other city in Russia. We will be applying to hold a sixth gay pride event in Moscow in May 2011," he told the BBC's Russian service. >>> | Thursday, October 21, 2010

Anti-terror Stop and Search Powers to Be Scrapped
THE GUARDIAN: Police forced to abandon power to stop and search the public without reasonable suspicion after European court rules it illegal

Under new guidelines police will no longer be allowed to stop and search individuals without having to show reasonable suspicion of terrorist activity. Photograph: The Guardian
The police's use of controversial counterterrorism stop and search powers against individuals is to be scrapped immediately, the home secretary announced today.

Under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, officers can stop and search anyone in a designated area without having to show reasonable suspicion. Interim operational guidelines to be issued to the police say that in future section 44 powers will be used only to search vehicles, and officers will have to have grounds for suspecting they are being used in connection with terrorism.

Section 44 stop and search powers were used on more than 148,798 occasions last year and have been a key element in the campaign against terrorism.

The home secretary's decision to scrap their use against individuals follows a ruling by the European court of human rights in January that the powers were unlawful because they were too broadly drawn and lacked sufficient safeguards to protect civil liberties.

The Strasbourg case was brought by peace protester Kevin Gillan and a journalist, Pennie Quinton, who were unlawfully abused when police stopped and searched them on their way to a demonstration outside the annual Excel centre arms fair in east London in 2003.

In an unexpected statement to the Commons today, May said she had taken urgent legal advice and consulted the police since the Strasbourg ruling was confirmed as final last Wednesday. "In order to comply with the judgment, but avoid pre-empting the review of counter-terrorism legislation, I have decided to introduce interim guidelines for the police," the home secretary told the Commons.

"I am therefore changing the test for authorisation for the use of section 44 powers from requiring a search to be 'expedient' for the prevention of terrorism, to the stricter test of it being 'necessary' for that purpose. And, most importantly, I am introducing a new suspicion threshold." >>> Alan Travis, home affairs editor | Thursday, July 08, 2010

Court: Same-sex Marriage Is Not Universal Right
ASSOCIATED PRESS: BRUSSELS — European nations do not have to allow same-sex marriage, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled, though gay rights groups claimed a partial victory Friday because the court acknowledged growing agreement that their relationships should be recognized in law.

Seven judges at the European court ruled unanimously that two Austrian men denied permission to wed were not covered by the guarantee of the right to marry enshrined in Europe's human rights convention.

The judges acknowledged "an emerging European consensus" that same-sex couples should have legal recognition but said individual states may still decide what form it should take because marriage had "deep-rooted social and cultural connotations which may differ largely from one society to another." >>> Robert Wielaard and Jill Lawless, AP | Friday, June 25, 2010

Swiss Minaret Appeal Goes to European Court
BBC: An appeal against last month's decision by Swiss voters to ban minarets has been submitted to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

The appeal was lodged by Hafid Ouardiri, an Algerian-born Muslim and a former spokesman for the Geneva Mosque.

Mr Ouardiri wants the court to rule that the ban is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Some 57.5% of Swiss voters and 22 out of 26 cantons - or provinces - voted in favour of the ban last month.

The referendum proposal was put forward by the Swiss People's Party (SVP), the largest party in parliament, which said minarets were a sign of Islamisation.

Switzerland's federal government had urged Swiss voters to reject it, warning it would contravene religious freedom and human rights and could stoke extremism. >>> | Wednesday, December 16, 2009

European Rights Court Rules Turkey Abused Women
REUTERS: ISTANBUL - The European Court of Human Rights ruled on Tuesday that Turkish police had abused two teenage girls suspected of supporting Kurdish separatism and authorities had failed to investigate their complaints properly.

Judges found credible the claims that Nazime Ceren Salmanoglu and Fatma Deniz Polattas, who were 16 and 19 at the time, were physically and sexually abused when police arrested them in 1999 during an operation against the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), according to a statement from the court.

The abuse included sodomy and forced virginity tests, which violate conventions against discrimination, the statement said.

Turkey has vowed to wipe out torture to meet European Union membership criteria on human rights. The European Commission said in its annual progress report it was "concerned" about an increase last year in the number of complaints of abuse. >>> © Thomson Reuters 2009 | Tuesday, March 17, 2009

The Dawning of a New Dark Age (Paperback & Hardback) – Free delivery >>>

Radical Preacher Abu Qatada Will 'Stay in Country' Despite Deportation Order
Radical cleric Abu Qatada will stay in Britian for months despite a House of Lords ruling that he should be deported to Jordan where he faces terror charges.

Photo of Abu Qatada courtesy of The Telegraph
THE TELEGRAPH: The Law Lords said Qatada, dubbed "Osama Bin Laden's right hand man in Europe", could be sent back to Jordan where he faces terror charges after overturning a Court of Appeal decision.

But the extremist could still remain in the country for many months if he takes his case to the European Court of Human Rights.

The judgment is a victory for the Home Office in its long-running campaign to remove Qatada from Britain, which has cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds already.

The Law Lords also ruled in favour of the Government over its attempts to deport two other men to Algeria.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said a deportation order will be served on Qatada immediately.

However any attempts to remove him would be put on hold if the case goes to Europe. >>> By Tom Whitehead, Home Affairs Editor | Wednesday, February 18, 2009

THE INDEPENDENT: Abu Qatada Awarded £2,500 for Detention

Radical preacher Abu Qatada was awarded £2,500 cash compensation today by European judges who ruled that his detention without trial breached his human rights.

Yesterday Qatada lost the latest round of his UK legal battle to stay in Britain.
But 24 hours later he won a separate case in the European Court of Human Rights that his detention under anti-terror laws introduced by the Government after the 2001 attacks on America violated the Human Rights Convention. >>> By Geoff Meade, Press Association | Thursday, February 19, 2009

The Dawning of a New Dark Age (Paperback & Hardback) – Free delivery >>>

Sikh Man Loses Right to Wear Turban in Driving Licence Photo after EU Court Ruling
Photo of Sikhs in turbans courtesy of the Mail Online
MAIL Online: A Sikh man who wanted the right to wear a turban while being photographed for his French drivers' licence has lost his case in the European Court of Human Rights.

Shingara Mann Singh, a French national, lost a series of appeals in France against the authorities who refused to issue a new licence with a photograph of him wearing a turban.

Under French regulations, motorists must appear 'bareheaded and facing forward' in their licence photographs but the Sikh religion requires men to wear a turban at all times.

Mr Singh, 52, took his case to the ECHR but the Strasbourg-based court dismissed the case. >>> | November 28, 2008

The Dawning of a New Dark Age (Broché) >>>
The Dawning of a New Dark Age (Relié) >>>

Danish Muslims Plan to Take Jyllands-Posten to Europe’s Highest Human Rights Court
I am sorry to say, folks, but we are reaping exactly what we have sown! These problems with Islam and Muslims are endless. They don’t fit in in a Western, liberal democracy; and that’s it! And nor will they ever! - ©Mark

ISLAMONLINE.NET: COPENHAGEN — Danish Muslims are planning to take Denmark's Jyllands-Posten daily to Europe's highest human rights court over the publication of satirical drawings of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him).

"[Danish] Muslim organizations intend to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights," Muslim leader Mohammed Khalid Samha told IslamOnline.net on Friday, June 20.

The move comes a day after a Danish court rejected a suit by seven Muslim groups against newspaper editors for publishing the offensive cartoons.

"We were quite sure that the Danish judiciary would not be fair to Muslims," said Samha. Muslims Take Prophet Cartoons to EU Court >>> By Nidal Abu Arif | June 20. 2008

KLEINVERZET:
International Arrest Warrant for Geert Wilders >>> | June 21, 2008

COOPER REPUBLIC:
Jordan Wants to Arrest Geert Wilders >>> | June 20, 2008

The Dawning of a New Dark Age – Dust Jacket Hardcover, direct from the publishers
The Dawning of a New Dark Age – Paperback, direct from the publishers

Britain Challenges the European Court of Human Rights
THE GUARDIAN: Britain launched an attempt at the European court of human rights yesterday to overturn an 11-year-old judgment by the court which bans the deportation of suspected terrorists to countries where they face a risk of torture or degrading treatment.

The government has been trying for two years to find a way of challenging the Strasbourg court's judgment in the 1996 Chahal case, which has frustrated its attempts to expel suspects to such countries as Tunisia and Algeria.

It was given permission to intervene in a case brought against the Netherlands by Mohammed Ramzy, a 22-year-old Algerian terror suspect, but that case has been held up by procedural delays.

However, yesterday the court's grand chamber of 17 judges heard Britain's arguments when it intervened in another case, brought against the Italian government by Nassim Saadi, 23, a suspected terrorist and brother of a suicide bomber. He was convicted of criminal conspiracy in Italy and given a 20-year sentence by a Tunisian military court in his absence for belonging to a terrorist organisation abroad and incitement to terrorism. UK challenges Strasbourg ban (more) By Clare Dyer and Alan Travis

Mark Alexander