Shamima Begum ~ A submission by JUSTICE to the Supreme Court

Let us step back a moment to the early days of the Queen's reign. Her Majesty became Queen on 6 February 1952 upon the death of her father - King George VI (1895-1952). The Coronation service was held at Westminster Abbey on 2 June 1953 and Her Majesty swore the Coronation Oath to govern her territories "according to their respective laws and customs?” 

One part of the ceremony was subjected to a great deal of comment at the time. This was the solemn moment when HRH The Duke of Edinburgh knelt before the Queen and swore to be her "liege man of life and limb and earthly worship". 

Here was a distinct reference

The Labour Party and antisemitism

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) was created by the Equality Act 2006 and has extensive powers to conduct investigations relating to equality and diversity and also human rights - Equality Act 2006 s.16. The framework for an investigation is set out in section 20 and Schedule 2 of the 2006 Act. The Commission is empowered to issue Unlawful Act Notices - section 21.

On Thursday 29 October, the Commission issued a report - Investigation into antisemitism in the Labour Party - finding unlawful acts of discrimination and harassment. The Commission's website stated -

"The Labour Party has been served with an unlawful act notice after an investigation into antisemitism by the Equality and Human Rights Commission found it responsible for unlawful acts of harassment and discrimination.

Following

Government by decree

'Government by decree - Covid-19 and the Constitution' was the Cambridge Freshfields lecture delivered on 27 October 2020 by Lord Sumption who was a Justice of the Supreme Court of the UK from 2012 to 2018.

When advertising the lecture, the University of Cambridge Law Faculty said - "The disputes over Brexit last year saw an attempt to make the executive, not Parliament, the prime source of authority in the Constitution. The coronavirus crisis has provoked another attempt to marginalise Parliament, this time with the willing acquiescence of the House of Commons. Is this to be our future?"

The text of Lord Sumption's lecture is now available - Government by decree: Covid-19 and the Constitution.

The lecture began -

Victim Personal Statements and sentencing

Victim Personal Statements "provide a practical way of ensuring that the sentencing court will, consider, in accordance with s.143 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, "any harm which the offence caused", reflecting on the evidence of the victim about the specific and personal impact of the offence or offences, or in the cases of homicide, on the family of the deceased" - per Lord Judge LCJ in Perkins [2013] EWCA Crim 323.

A number of cases have reached the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) in which Victim Personal Statements resulted in an offence being placed into a higher category of seriousness. The result of that is of course a longer sentence. Sentencing requires up to date information about the offender at the time of sentencing and a VPS can assist with this but fairness demands that such statements are not only accurate but that the correct procedure is followed when bringing the statements into evidence.

Consider R v Reece Dylan Jones [2020] EWCA 1139.

On 25 October 2019, the appellant

Joesph Karumba Wangige ~ a second prosecution oppressive

The criminal law has a principle that, in the absence of special cirumstancess, a later prosecution cannot be based on substantially the same facts as resulted in a prior conviction - Beedie [1998] QB 356. 

This arose in the case of Joesph Karumba Wangige [2020] EWCA Crime 1319 - Davis LJ, Lavender and Pepperall JJ. 

On the night of 26 November 2016, Mr Wangige was driving his Vauxhall Astra and he ran into Mr Russell Lee (32) who was crossing the road. Wangige did not stop. Mr Lee suffered serious injuries from he died on 30 November 2016.

A Collision report was prepared

Coronavirus: some areas move to greater restrictions

NOTE: The law referred to in this post was replaced from 5 November 2020. The post is retained here for record purposes. 

Amendment Regulations were made by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on 22 October and are mostly in force from Friday 23 October 2020. The Regulations move a number of areas into a higher coronavirus alert level. For example, Greater Manchester moved from Level 2 (High) to Level 3 (Very High).

The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Local COVID-19 Alert Level) (Medium, High and Very High) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2020 - SI 2020/1154.

Legislation for the 3 levels of alert:

• Health Protection (Coronavirus, Local COVID-19 Alert Level) (Medium) (England) Regulations 2020
• Health Protection (Coronavirus, Local COVID-19 Alert Level) (High) (England) Regulations 2020
• Health Protection (Coronavirus, Local COVID-19 Alert Level) (Very High) (England) Regulations 2020

and see previous post of 13 October 2020.

A very helpful website is Kings Chambers - Living in Tier 3: Useful links and guidance for individuals and families and Useful links for business and The Latest Covid Regulations Practical Guidance

Financial support and political rancour:

UK Internal Market Bill ~ House of Lords Second Reading

The government's UK Internal Market Bill is before the House of Lords and its second reading commenced on Monday 19 October (Hansard) and continued on 20 October (Hansard).  The Bill contains a number of clauses seeking to enable Ministers to breach international law (i.e. the Withdrawal Agreement).  Specifically, the repugnant clauses are 44 (Power to disapply or modify export declarations or other exit procedures), 45 (Regulations about Article 10 of the Northern Ireland Protocol), and 46 (Further provision relating to sections 44 and 45 etc.  Clause 46 seeks to prevent legal challenge on any ground whatseoever.

Lord Judge, a former Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, moved a motion of regret that - "this House regrets that Part 5 of the bill contains provisions which, if enacted, would undermine the rule of law and damage the reputation of the United Kingdom.”​ The Bill was read a second time (395 votes to 169) with Lord Judge's motion approved. Lord Judge's speech,