Tag: European Convention on Human Rights

IF ELECTED AS BRITISH PRIME MINISTER TOMMOROW – THERESA MAY WILL PULL OUT OF THE ‘EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS – THIS EFFECTS EVERYONE !!!

WHICH HAS BEEN ABIDED TO SINCE 1953 – VOTE JEREMY CORBYN…

Theresa May: “Human rights laws could change for terror fight” What she really means is that she will abolish it completely and no longer abide by the ‘European  Convention on Human rights’ this is bad for everyone. Including Ireland, Scotland and Wales!

Theresa May says she will change human rights laws if they “get in the way” of tackling terror suspects.
She said she wants to do more to restrict the freedom of those posing a threat and to deport foreign suspects.
The UK could seek opt-outs from the European Convention on Human Rights, which it has abided by since 1953.
Labour said the UK would not defeat terrorism “by ripping up basic rights”. The Lib Dems said it was a “cynical” move ahead of Thursday’s election.
Rival parties have been criticising the Conservatives over police cuts following the terror attacks in London and Manchester.
Live: Follow the latest developments in the campaign
Last push for votes in election campaign
Manifesto guide: What the parties are promising
Speaking after Saturday’s London attack, Mrs May said “enough is enough” and that “things need to change” in the terror fight.

Nick Clegg tells Today Theresa May’s comments about human rights laws aren’t supported by evidence
Addressing activists in Slough on Tuesday evening, she did not make any specific new policy proposals but said: “I mean longer prison sentences for those convicted of terrorist offences.
“I mean making it easier for the authorities to deport foreign terrorist suspects back to their own countries.
“And I mean doing more to restrict the freedom and movements of terrorist suspects when we have enough evidence to know they are a threat, but not enough evidence to prosecute them in full in court.
“And if our human rights laws get in the way of doing it, we will change the law so we can do it.”
Sources suggest if elected on Friday, Theresa May might consider ideas of curfews, controls on who people can visit and suspects’ access to communications.
More controversially,

Labour has immediately cried foul, claiming another manifesto U-turn, at almost the last minute of the campaign.
Tory sources deny that flatly, saying they would not pull out of the European Convention on Human Rights but instead, seek fresh derogations – essentially legal opt-outs.
Theresa May’s team say she is not, at this late stage, making up last-minute policy, but that the terror risk has changed so fast since the start of the election, that she wanted to make clear that if re-elected she is prepared to toughen the law.
Read more from Laura
In an interview with The Sun, Mrs May said she would also consider extending the time suspects could be held without charge to 28 days, after it was reduced to 14 days in 2011 under the coalition.
“We said there may be circumstances where it is necessary to do this. I will listen to what they [the police and security services] think is necessary for us to do.”
What powers do the police have?
What new anti-terror powers could be used?
The Conservative manifesto committed the party to remaining in the European Convention on Human Rights – which is separate to the EU and which the UK helped to establish after World War Two – for the whole of the next Parliament.
Conservative sources say they would not withdraw from the ECHR but would seek temporary opt-outs called “derogations” from certain aspects.
This could possibly include Article 5 – which guarantees individuals’ rights to liberty and security and the right to a trial “within a reasonable time”, while protecting against unlawful arrest and detention.
During last year’s Conservative leadership campaign, Mrs May said she personally backed leaving the ECHR, saying it made it harder to deport terror suspects and criminals. But she later said she did not believe there was enough support in Parliament for the move.
‘Cynical’
The Conservatives have said they will reconsider the UK’s human rights legal framework after leaving the EU but that the 1998 Human Rights Act will remain in place until that time. The party has long proposed replacing it will a British Bill of Rights.
Sir Keir Starmer, the former director of public prosecutions who is now Labour’s shadow Brexit secretary, told Today the Human Rights Act “had not got “in the way of what we were doing” during his many years prosecuting serious crime.
He warned against “throwing away the very values that are at the heart of our democracy and everything we believe in”.

Media captionDamian Green tells Today it is possible to have derogations from the European Convention on Human Rights
Labour’s leader, Jeremy Corbyn, said laws were already in place to deal with people, including foreign nationals, who presented a threat and that the government must always act “within the law”.
What is the European Convention of Human Rights?
Judges on the European Court of Human RightsImage copyrightECHR
The ECHR is a treaty between the 47 Council of Europe member states and is intended to protect the human rights of the 822 million people who live in its jurisdiction
All European states, except for Belarus, are members of the convention. It includes right to life, prohibition of torture, slavery and forced labour, and the right to a fair trial
Cases are heard in the European Court of Human Rights, which was established in 1959 in Strasbourg
The cases that European judges rule on include allegations of human rights abuses, discrimination, the improper conduct of trials and the mistreatment of prisoners
Former Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg said the PM was making a “very cynical” attempt to appeal to UKIP voters, telling the BBC “attacking the principles of human rights legislation is not the right way to keep us safe”.
Speaking on Today, he denounced the “explosive claim, free from any evidence, that the problem lies with human rights legislation”, saying the prime minister had a “track record” of making “ludicrous” claims about the impact of the laws.
He said ministers’ focus should be on the fact that one of the perpetrators of the London Bridge attacks had been on a Italian terror watchlist and whether this information had been properly shared and acted upon.
Linking Brexit to security, he added: “I think we need to enhance our use of those EU-wide databases which are proving to be the most sophisticated pool of information about would-be criminals.”
“It would be illegal for 27 other countries in the European Union to share data with us if we in the future, under Theresa May’s plans, rule out abiding by European Union data protection rules.”
UKIP has already backed extending pre-charge detention to 28 days. Their immigration spokesman Jon Bickley said the UK had to “stop being so tolerant of other people’s intolerance”.

With thanks to the: BBC

Liam Campbell cannot get a fair trial in Lithuania

Stop the extradition of Liam Campbell to Lithuaina

Liam Campbell, an alleged Real IRA leader, will argue that he cannot receive a fair trial in Lithuania because his brother’s terrorism conviction was found to have been based on entrapment.

Campbell, 54, of Upper Faughart in north Louth, who was found liable for the 1998 Omagh bomb in a civil action eight years ago, appeared in the High Court in Dublin yesterday to contest his extradition to Lithuania, where he is accused of a Real IRA plot to buy large quantities of explosives and weapons.

Brian Gageby, his barrister, told the court that he wanted an adjournment while he sought an English translation of Michael Campbell’s trial and appeal in Vilnius. Mr Gageby is preparing to argue that Liam Campbell cannot receive a fair trial, which is required under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Campbell’s brother was convicted in Lithuania in 2011 of conspiracy to buy weapons and explosives, following a joint MI5-Lithuanian police operation. Michael Campbell was jailed for twelve years but his conviction was overturned on appeal in 2013 on the grounds that he was entrapped by MI5. Liam Campbell is now seeking a transcript of that appeal to use in his case.

Since Michael Campbell returned to Ireland the highest court in Lithuania overturned the appeal, finding that the appeal court erred in putting too much weight on entrapment defence. As a result Michael Campbell may also be extradited back to Lithuania.

Judge Aileen Donnelly agreed to adjourn Liam Campbell’s case for a month yesterday to allow the state and the defence to prepare documents.

Campbell is receiving free legal aid to fight extradition, claiming that he will not get a fair trial and also that prison conditions in Lithuania are so bad that they violate Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The article prohibits extradition if there is a “substantial risk” that the person will undergo inhumane or degrading treatment.

He won on Article 3 grounds when Lithuania sought to extradite him from Northern Ireland, after which he was released by the High Court in Belfast and was rearrested in the Republic. Campbell’s co-accused, Brendan McGuigan, 36, of Omeath, Co Louth, was previously released by the High Court in Dublin, also because prison conditions in Lithuania would be a violation of his rights under Article 3.

Both men are wanted in Lithuania for allegedly organising a Real IRA explosives and weapons importation scheme. A Lithuanian arrest warrant read in court states that Campbell “made arrangements for illegal possession of a considerable amount of powerful firearms, ammunition, explosive devices and substances” to be exported from Lithuania to Ireland for use by a “terrorist grouping”.

The cargo was allegedly to include sniper rifles, rocket launchers, RPG-7 rockets, hand-grenades and Semtex explosives.

Campbell was allegedly a senior Real IRA member when the offences were committed in late 2006 and early 2007 and is alleged to have met with a British intelligence officer posing as an east European arms dealer.

with many thanks to: Irish Republican Prisoner News.

THE PSNI/RUC (reformed are you having a laugh) Abandon Challenge To Stop-And-Search ruling.

POLICE have a banded a planned Supreme Court challenge to a ruling that stop, search and question operations involving a former IRA hunger striker and a brother-in-law of Martin McGunness were unlawful.

77160_441683515920135_532535424_n

“Anyone ever stopped and searched under Section 21 of the Stop and Search Act,

Seek legal advice and sue the PSNI/RUC

It was ilillegal and you are entitled to claim against our

so-called great unbiased police service – TAL32.

Senoir judges in Belfast have been told an appeal by the cheif contabe and secretary of state in the cases of Bernard Fox and Marvin Canning was no longer being persued. Both men are now to press ahead with claimes for damages againt the PSNI/RUC, with Mr Cannings ‘ lawyer disclosing he has been stopped more than 100 times. Eariler this year the Court of Appeal held there was a lack of adequate safegards against potental abuse of system used under the Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007. Mr Canning, from Derry, said the stop and question powers were incomppatible with his right to privacy under Euorpean law. The 55-year-old, who is related to the deputy first minister through marriage, alleged that officers were sometimes oppressive and confrontational. He denies any involvement in terrorism but confirmed he is a member of the 32 County Sovereignty Movement, stating it is not an illegal organization. Police had rejected claims that powers under the act were arbitrary used against him.

2013-09-08 21.17.36

A similar judicial rreview challenge was brought by Mr Fox, who took part in the 1981 Hunger strike at the Maze Prison, and his companion Christine McNulty. The Belfast man served more than 20 years in prison for offences including possession of explosives before being released under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement. Police stopped a car he and Ms McNulty were travelling in near Camlough, Co Armagh in March 2011. Their vehicle was searched for munitions, while an officer allegedly took Ms McNulty’s handbag and went through the contents. Mr Fox denies any invovement with dissident republican activities. Police argued that the power was not intended to be used randomly but rather on the basis of threat. Lawyers in both cases successfully overturned a previous High Court decision that no violation under the European Convention on Human Rights had occourred. In the Court of appeal ruling Lord Justice Girvan identified the absence of a code of practice for stop and question operatins under Section 21 of the act. The legal framework pending the introduction of an effective code dies not contain the kind of safeguards against potential abuse or arbitrariness, he held.

Although ammendments have been made to the section dealing with stop-and-search actions, the court ruled in favour of Mr Fox and Ms McNulty based on the situation at the time. Counsel for the chief constable and the secretary of state was expected to attempt to appeal the verdicts at the UK’s highest court but both pulled out at the last minute. However, Tony McGleenan QC on Friday told the Court of Appeal: “I have received instructions this morning that we are not to pursue the appliction for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court in either the Fox or McNulty cases.” Following the notification Mr Canning’s solicitor Paul Pierce of KRW law said: “In veiw of the decision by the chief constable and the secretary of state to abandon the appeal, it now confirms the ruling that the stop and search powers used by police were unlawful. “The fact that a code of practice has now been introduced does not remeady the unlawful use of these wide-ranging powers.” “Our client will now be pursuring a claim for damages, having been subjected to these stop and search powers in excess of 100 times.”

With many thanks to : The Irish News.

Related articles

Related articles

Forced strip search of Pomeroy woman a ‘Brutal Sex Assault’ !

1149256_229184437238935_424976728_o-1

Sharon Rafferty

A REPUBLICAN prisoners welfare group have claimed that a forced strip search carried out on a Pomeroy woman last month amounted to a “brutal sexual assault”.

Sharon Rafferty (38) of Cavana Linn in Pomeroy is currently awaiting trial on five charges related to alleged dissident republican activity in Tyrone.

Detained in Hydebank Prison on remand since May 2012, on August 14 she left the South Belfast prison for the first time in 15 months for a preliminary investigation hearing at Omagh Courthouse alongside her co-accused Gavin Coney, Aidan Coney and Sean Kelly.

According to Mandy Duffy of the Irish Republican Prisoners Welfare Association (IRPWA), prior to her departure from the prison, force was used after Rafferty refused to remove clothing in her cell. The procedure was repeated upon her return according to the spokesperson, who regularly visits the 38-year-old.

Describing the procedure as “degrading and humiliating”, Ms Duffy said the Pomeroy woman had not reported any physical injuries, but had been left “distressed” by the ordeal.

It’s understood to be the first time in recent years that a female republican prisoner has been made subject to a strip search.

In a statement, the Northern Ireland Prison Service (NIPS) said it could not comment on individual prisoners.

Strip searching of female prisoners became one of the most controversial features of the troubles when it was introduced in Armagh gaol in 1982.

JUDICIAL REVIEW

In more recent times the practice came under the spotlight in 2005, when the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) helped non-republican prisoner Karen Carson bring a judicial review before the High Court in Belfast, claiming frequent strip searching in Hydebank was in violation of articles three and eight of the European Convention on Human Rights, which relate to torture and privacy.

While Justice Girvan said that the articles had not been breached, in his judgement he found that the existing policy “cannot be demonstrated to be proportionate and necessary”.

The comments prompted a review of the NIPS policy for strip searching female prisoners, which led to new policy being introduced in September 2010.

According to the Chief Inspector of Criminal Justice in Northern Ireland, the new policy had by 2011 ended routine strip searching of all new arrivals at Hydebank.

Random searches were also scaled back, but the policy of strip searching has been retained, albeit under a new two stage procedure, with the initial stage allowing the prisoner to retain their underwear.

However according to the Department of Justice, “If staff had suspicions or intelligence has been received to suggest the woman could be concealing items in her underwear she would be required to proceed to a level 2 search. This would require her to remove the clothing from the top half of her body including underwear, when dressed she would remove the clothing from the bottom half of her body including her underwear.”

The new provisions also still allow for prisoners to be forcibly strip searched if they refuse to comply with a full search, using “approved control and restraint techniques”.

‘TRAUMATIC IMPACT’

Speaking to the Tyrone Herald, a spokesperson for the NIHRC said it supports the Prison Review Team’s 2011 recommendation to find an effective and less intrusive alternative to strip searching.

“The Commission’s 2005 research revealed the traumatic impact of strip searching on women and recommended that its use should be exceptional and restricted.”

It said while it had not received any complaints about the use of strip searching on women prisoners in recent times, the body intends to raise the issue of Sharon Rafferty’s forced search on August 14 during a visit with the Prison Service later this month.

Mandy Duffy said both male and female republican prisoners refuse to submit to strip searching, claiming that scanners exist that deem the practice unnecessary. On August 14, she said Rafferty’s three co-accused were also similarly strip searched by force at Maghaberry Prison after refusing to comply with requests to remove clothing.

“There is technology in place that removes the need for any prisoner to remove their clothing,” said the IRPWA spokesperson, “Sharon said she did not want to humiliate herself.”

PROTEST

The fallout over strip searching resulted in male prisoners at Maghaberry Prison staging a dirty protest over 18 months, which came to an end last year when the Department of Justice launched a trial of two millimetre wave scanners at Hydebank. However in February, the department said the scanners would not replace full body searches after a Prison Service report emerged claiming that just 57 per-cent of items tested had been detected.

Republican prisoners at both Hydebank and Maghaberry are currently held in separate wings from the main prison population.

The separation resulted in Sharon Rafferty, as the only republican prisoner in Hydebank, spending more than one year in effective isolation, until she was joined in June this year by a second female republican prisoner, Christine Connor. Mandy Duffy claimed Connor was denied a hospital appointment on August 23 after she refused to comply with a strip search on departure from the prison.

“With the policy now that they are going to be asking republican prisoners to comply with strip searches, that they will refuse, this is going to have an impact on hospital appointments and doctors appointments,” she claimed.

“Christine does have medical concerns. She has kidney problems and she does need to attend her appointments. Therefore she is being denied her rights to medical attention.”

Former Republican prisoner speaks out on Maghaberry protests

With many thanks to -:

The Ulster Herald | 12-14 John Street |

T: +44 (0)28 8224 3444

E: contact@ulsterherald.com

Related articles

Today, September 2nd 2013, is the 63rd Birthday of Martin Corey – RELEASE HIM NOW !!!

1184852_435293783245979_1909101532_n

James Connolly Assoc Australia

Statement received by us from Jim McIlmurray on Martin Corey‘s continuing internment. It is tragic today is Martin’s birthday and he remains indefinitely interned in Maghaberry.

Today, September 2, 2013, is the 63rd birthday of Martin Corey.

Today is also the date the Parole Commissioners were to commence Martin’s annual

Parole hearing. We received communication on Friday, the 30th of August, informing us that this open hearing to review Martin’s ongoing detention would NOT commence on this date, with no alternative date being suggested or Today, September 2, 2013, is the 63rd birthday of Martin Corey.

Today is

also the date the Parole Commissioners were to commence Martin’s annual

Parole hearing. We received communication on Friday, the 30th of

August, informing us that this open hearing to review Martin’s ongoing

detention would NOT commence on this date, with no alternative

date being suggested or discussed

with us.

Martin is entitled by law to an annual Parole hearing,

and yet he has NOT received one in over TWO YEARS. A variety of reasons

have been given for the delay, including blaming Martin himself for his

“legal challenges”

against his detention under Article 5 (4) (the right to have a court

decide the lawfulness of his detention under the European convention of

Human Rights).

Recent violations of Human Rights in the Middle

East have received worldwide condemnation, including by the British

government who stated “they will continue to play an active and

forthright role in international institutions that promote and protect

human rights.” They also emphasised the UK’s own commitment to

strengthen human rights, both domestically and internationally.

The

European Court of Human Rights ruled in 2012 that it was unacceptable

to deny an annual parole hearing to anyone held in custody. This ruling

followed a case of a man who waited 14 months for a parole hearing.

Martin Corey has now waited 25 MONTHS.

The Secretary of State in a

recent communication stated, “an individual who served a life sentence

can be returned to prison if

they pose a risk to the public or commits further offences.” Since

Martin’s arrest in April 2010, he has NEVER been charged with a crime,

questioned by police regarding a crime, or given any explanation as to

the risk he poses to the public.

Martin served 19 years in prison

prior to his release in 1992. He has now served the equivalent of a

seven year sentence since his arrest in 2010.

Martin has NOT committed any crime. He poses NO risk to the public and I am calling for his immediate release today.

I

spoke with Martin this morning and he wishes to express his gratitude

to those who sent messages and cards and also for their continued

support in highlighting the ongoing injustice perpetrated upon him by

the British government.

Jim McIlmurray with us.

Martin is entitled by law to an annual Parole hearing, and yet he has NOT received one in over TWO YEARS. A variety of reasons have been given for the delay, including blaming Martin himself for his “legal challenges” against his detention under Article 5 (4) (the right to have a court decide the lawfulness of his detention under the European convention of Human Rights).

Recent violations of Human Rights in the Middle East have received worldwide condemnation, including by the British government who stated “they will continue to play an active and forthright role in international institutions that promote and protect human rights.” They also emphasised the UK’s own commitment to strengthen human rights, both domestically and internationally.

The European Court of Human Rights ruled in 2012 that it was unacceptable to deny an annual parole hearing to anyone held in custody. This ruling followed a case of a man who waited 14 months for a parole hearing.

Martin Corey has now waited 25 MONTHS.

The Secretary of State in a

recent communication stated, “an individual who served a life sentence can be returned to prison ifthey pose a risk to the public or commits further offences.”

Since Martin’s arrest in April 2010, he has NEVER been charged with a crime, questioned by police regarding a crime, or given any explanation as to the risk he poses to the public.

Martin served 19 years in prison

prior to his release in 1992. He has now served the equivalent of a seven year sentence since his arrest in 2010.

Martin has NOT committed any crime. He poses NO risk to the public and I am calling for his immediate release today.

I spoke with Martin this morning and he wishes to express his gratitude to those who sent messages and cards and also for their continued support in highlighting the ongoing injustice perpetrated upon him by the British government.

Jim McIlmurray

Related articles

pleae support the release of brendan lillis

 
 
pleae support the release of brendan lillis

freedom before he dies Learn More

 

    <iframe src=’http://widgets.causes.com/badges/cause?cause_id=621843&width=300&height=210&tagline=Support+Our+Cause&faces=1&awareness=0&#8242; style=’width: 300px; height: 210px; overflow: hidden; border: none;’ allowTransparency=’true’ scrolling=’no’ frameborder=’0′></iframe>
 
 
SIGN UP AND SUPPORT THE RELEASE OF BRENDAN LILLIS
BEFORE IT’S TO LATE DON’T LET HIM DIE IN PRISION!!!!!!!!!
 
 
 

 

FREE BRENDAN LILLIS PLEASE DON’T LET HIM DIE IN PRISON

Home Office
Image via Wikipedia
 

 
 
Dear Ms Franklin,Thank you for contacting me about the experience of Mr Brendan Lillis. I was concerned to read it.

However, as I’m sure you can appreciate, I am not a legal expert and as such cannot provide you with the detailed response you would like on this specific case.
…
I As an elected Member of Parliament, I have raised it with the Home Office on your behalf and will of course keep you updated with any response I receive.

With best wishes
Chloe

Chloe Smith
Member of Parliament for Norwich North
www.chloesmith.org.ukSee more

www.chloesmith.org.uk

I am the Conservative Member of Parliament for Norwich North. On my website, you will find my news, articles, campaigns and details of surgery dates.

THIS IS THE COMPLETE LETTER SENT BY THE NORTHERN IRELAND PRISON SERVICE REGARDING THE SITUATION ASS OF NOW WITH BRENDAN LILLIS

 

8th June 2011

Dear Ms De Bortoli

We are replying to your e-mail about the case of Brendan Lillis. 

Brendan Lillis was released from prison in March 1993 having served       

 16 years 4 months of four life sentences following his conviction on four separate bombing charges in 1976.  He was re-arrested in October 2009 on charges connected with an attempted kidnapping.  His case was referred to the independent Parole Commissioners for Northern Ireland and they recommended that his life licence should be revoked as they concluded that his behaviour had demonstrated that he had become a danger to the public – contrary to the terms of his life licence.  The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland accepted this advice and Brendan Lillis resumed serving his four life sentences in November 2009.

The court has decided that the recent charges against Mr Lillis are not to be proceeded with at present, as it has taken the view that he is not fit to attend trial.  However these charges have not been dropped and they remain against him.  I understand from the Public Prosecution Service that this situation will remain under review. 

While I am not in a position to detail the specifics of Mr Lillis’s condition I can assure you that the Northern Ireland Prison Service has made strenuous efforts to ensure that his full health care needs have been and are continuing to be met in a satisfactory and appropriate manner in prison custody and that his health is not suffering from any lack of attention.  He is under the care of a consultant who reviews his case regularly and he has undergone a number of investigations and treatments – the same level of treatment that he would have received were he living in the community. Indeed the physician employed by Mr Lillis’s legal team to review his case has complimented the standard of medical care that Mr Lillis is receiving in custody.

 Given these circumstances the Minister of Justice does not consider that exceptional grounds exist which would justify the release of Mr Lillis on compassionate grounds.

The Parole Commissioners for Northern Ireland are currently reviewing the revocation of Mr Lillis’s life licence but this is a matter entirely for them.  The Minister of Justice will be guided by whatever decision they make in relation to the continued need for Mr Lillis to remain in custody. 

The Department of Justice for Northern Ireland is entirely confident that there has been no abuse of Mr Lillis’s rights under the European Convention on Human Rights

Yours sincerely

Life Sentence Unit

    

OFFENSIVE RESPONSE FROM NIO re BRENDAN LILLIS

 
OFFENSIVE RESONSE FROM NIO re BRENDAN LILLIS
by Irish Freedom Committee, Inc. on Wednesday, 25 May 2011 at 02:29
 

Several members of the Irish Freedom Committee received this insulting form letter from the NIO earlier today.  What the hell is this office for then?!? Are we wrong does it not seat the Justice Minister?!?  What a bunch of sorry, useless buck-passers.

RELEASE BRENDAN LILLIS NOW!

From: NIOISWeb <NIOISWeb@nio.x.gsi.gov.uk>

Sent: Tue, May 24, 2011 8:51:40 AM

Subject: RE: Contact Us > Web Feedback Form

Thank you for your e mail. However this is not a matter for the NIO. You may wish to contact the Northern Ireland Prison Service ( DoJNI) Department of Justice Northern Ireland.

NIO Web Team

From: info@nio.gov.uk [mailto:info@nio.gov.uk]

Sent: 12 May 2011 21:49

To: NIOISWeb

Subject: NIO: Contact Us > Web Feedback Form

The following enquiry was received today:

first name:     xxxxxxxxx

last name:     xxxxxxxxx

contact email:     xxxxxxxxx

enquiry:     I am writing from the Irish Freedom Committee to urge the immediate compassionate release from prison of Brendan Lillis, a seriously ill prisoner who is being held without charge at Maghaberry prison outside of Belfast.

Brendan suffers from a painful and incurable condition called ankylosing spondylitis, which has rendered him bedridden for many months, and who has been deemed in a January 2010 High Court ruling to be unfit to stand trial. Despite this, and despite the charges against him subsequently being dropped, this man remains held in isolat ion, bedridden, with no access to fresh air or the outside world, denied the regular physical therapy that he badly needs, and without the specialist medical care that could ease the remainder of life he still has.

I am aware that Brendan Lillis is protected under the European Convention on Human Rights, and that the continued detention of this man is in contraindication of Article 5, the Right to Liberty and Security – specifically the duty the state owes Brendan to inform him of the reason for his continued detention; and Article 6, the Right to a Fair Trial. I am also aware that Brendan Lillis has a protected right under the EU HR Convention to the Provision of Medical Services under Article 2 the Right to Life.

Please immediately release Brendan Lillis back to his family and to seek specialist care for his rare, incurable and painful medical condition. This man is a threat to no-one in this condition, and his release is the right and humane thing to do !

xxxxxxxx

This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call your organisation’s IT Helpdesk.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes. This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content and cleared by MailMarshal

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.

A copy of letter to be posted to VIP’s ( links inc in post )

To whom it may concern,

I am writing from the Irish Freedom Committee to urge the immediate compassionate release from prison of Brendan Lillis, a seriously ill prisoner who is being held without charge at Maghaberry prison outside of Belfast.

Brendan suffers from a painful and incurable condition called ankylosing spondylitis, which has rendered him bedridden for many months, and who has been deemed in a January 2010 High Court ruling to be unfit to stand trial. Despite this, and despite the charges against him subsequently being dropped, this man remains held in isolation, bedridden, with no access to fresh air or the outside world, denied the regular physical therapy that he badly needs, and without the specialist medical care that could ease the remainder of life he still has.

I am aware that Brendan Lillis is protected under the European Convention on Human Rights, and that the continued detention of this man is in contraindication of Article 5, the Right to Liberty and Security – specifically the duty the state owes Brendan to inform him of the reason for his continued detention; and Article 6, the Right to a Fair Trial. I am also aware that Brendan Lillis has a protected right under the EU HR Convention to the Provision of Medical Services under Article 2 the Right to Life.

Please immediately release Brendan Lillis back to his family and to seek specialist care for his rare, incurable and painful medical condition.  This man is a threat to no-one in this condition, and his release is the right and humane thing to do!
 

Sincerely,

 

http://www.irishfreedomcommittee.net/POWs/BRENDAN_LILLIS.htm

 

 

 

%d bloggers like this: