Ceremonial Funerals ~ Public Order

The ceremonial funeral of Baroness Thatcher is to take place in London on Wednesday 17th April - see No. 10 Downing Street.  The armed forces have held a rehearsal and Police activity is being managed - Metropolitan Police statement  and  Operation True Blue.

Plans for ceremonial funerals are certainly not made on the spur of the moment.  The idea of a ceremonial funeral for Lady Thatcher originated from Prime Minister Gordon Brown and arguments against holding such an event were put forward - for example, by Peter Oborne writing in  The Telegraph December 2011.   It did not need any great foresight to see that this funeral would be highly controversial and that public order problems were likely.

This funeral will have been meticulously planned (with the Police involved in the planning).  However, what does public order law say about processions?

Baroness Thatcher of Kesteven

Although law and politics have an overlap, the main aim of this blog is to look at the law as either enacted through Parliament or expounded by the judges through their judgments in decided cases.  Occasionally, it seems appropriate to depart to some extent from that norm.  The death of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher seems to me to be such a time.  I did not admire every policy adopted by the 'Iron Lady' and her government's implementation of policy could be uncaring and even brutal.  Nevertheless, I had admiration for her conviction and courage.  In this post my aim is merely to touch upon a few of the issues which arose in her time in office and which had long-lasting influence on the law.

Thatcher became Prime Minister in May 1979 and served until November 1990.  She was preceded by James Callaghan (Labour) who, on 28th March 1979, lost a vote of confidence in the House of Commons - (see Wikipedia - Callaghan Vote).  A general election was called and was won by the Conservative Party under Margaret Thatcher.  Interestingly, Callaghan lost the vote of confidence by just one vote which, at the time, I thought surprising given the Winter of Discontent 1978-79.

European Union accession to the European Convention on Human Rights

Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union states that the Union shall accede to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.  Art 6(3) of the Treaty states that fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, shall constitute general principles of the Union's law.

At present, Art 6(3) operates to make the rights in the E Conv HR general principles of EU law.   This is reflective of what occurred through the influence of the European Court of Justice - now the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU).  A useful analysis of how the court has embraced human rights may be read at  Human Rights and the European Court of Justice - Elizabeth Defeis, Fordham Journal of International Law 2007 Vol 31 Article 2.

Art 6(2) will take matters further by making the EU itself a signatory to the E Conv HR.  

Legal aid - death by a thousand cuts

The present government was always unlikely to be satisfied with their already severe cuts to civil legal aid enacted by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of  Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO).   The Solicitor's Journal takes a look at the latest Ministry of Justice moves on legal aid - Civil legal aid faces further big cuts.  The further 'big cuts' amount to something in the region of £220m each year.

The Ministry claims that it is Making legal aid fairer fairer for taxpayers and is addressing a number of 'abuses' in the system.   The full consultation paper is at Ministry of Justice - Transforming legal aid: Delivering a more credible and efficient system.

The key features in the consultation are:

A High number of care applications for children ~ Universal Credit ~ Working Together

The number of care applications for children continues to be high.  Local Government Lawyer highlights the numbers: 998 in February 2013; 925 in March and 11,055 in a 12 month period. The article does not look at the reasons for this.  No doubt, the current economic climate is playing a part and support for families in difficulty is becoming thin on the ground as reductions to local authority budgets bite ever deeper.   In many families where children are considered to be at risk of 'significant harm' (Children Act 1989 s31) there are adults with drink or drug dependency and with lack of basic skills such as budgeting income.  The system of benefits is being reformed and, in Greater Manchester, we are seeing the beginnings of 'Universal Credit' - (Dept. of Work and Pensions).  I wonder what impact this will have on children?  Will the receipt of a single payment be just that bit too tempting for some parents?

There is

Monday items

(1) A post by Simon McKay - On Summary Military Justice - is well worth reading.  The military justice system continues to be a problematic area and McKay explains why.  See also post on Sgt. Nightingale's case.

(2) Governmental activity to drive down legal aid is set to continue as Grayling sets sights on prisoners' legal aid - Law Society Gazette 4th April.

(3) There is until 12th April to comment on the consultation about implementation of Part1 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 - Ministry of Justice consultations.   The consultation paper seeks views on proposed coroner investigation regulations, inquest rules, fee and allowance regulations, coroner areas, and statutory guidance for bereaved people.  Previous recent posts relating to Coroners - here.

(4) Some interesting brief sentencing remarks

R v Philpott, Philpott and Mosley ~ Sentencing remarks of Mrs Justice Thirlwall

The manslaughter of 6 children as a result of a deliberately set fire must rank high in the catalogue of heinous crimes.  The sentencing remarks of Mrs Justice Thirlwall in the case of Philpott, Philpott and Mosley are available. The children ranged in age from 5 to 13 and they died as a direct result of a fire set by the three defendants.  Thirlwall J noted that, of the 3 defendants, Michael Philpott was the 'driving force behind this shockingly dangerous enterprise.'

Michael Philpott was sentenced to life imprisonment and must serve a minimum of 15 years before parole may be considered.  There is no guarantee that he will be released after the 15 years.  Life sentences are explained here and also see Ministry of Justice Life sentenced prisoners

Mairead Philpott (mother of the children) and Paul Mosley (family friend) were each sentenced to 17 years imprisonment and must serve half before release on licence.

Forget the political side show about the benefits Philpott received.  Thirlwall J got to the heart of his true character and the appalling deed he committed.  In the judge's words, Philpott is a 'disturbingly dangerous man' with 'no moral compass.'

The judge