<

Monday, March 02, 2009

Feel free to copy, there is no copyright on an Anoneumouse montage. (click on image to enlarge)

Fred's Stuffed

As Daniel Hannan points out in his Telegraph blog: Harriet Harman wants a Bill of Attainder against Sir Fred Goodwin

A bill of attainder is an Act of Parliament for punishing a person without trial in the usual form.

Thus by a legislative act a person is put in the same position as if he had been convicted after a regular trial in a court of law.

And there is no appeal on human rights grounds

Section 6 of the Human Rights Act states It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right.

BUT does not include either House of Parliament or a person exercising functions in connection with proceedings in Parliament.

So, citing Article 6 and Article 1 of the first protocol of the convention will not apply

"Pandora's box!"

Update:

This could be Fred's get out clause

Section 11 of the Human Rights Act 1998. states: A person's reliance on a Convention right does not restrict-any other right or freedom conferred on him by or under any law having effect in any part of the United Kingdom;

The saving grace. The Bill of Rights 1689

An Act of Attainder requires Royal Assent.

A Bill of Attainder is a pretended power of dispensing with laws or the execution of laws and the forfeiture of a legally granted pension is cruel and unusual punishment.

Perhaps Harriet Harman, being a QC, should read up on the case of Ashford v. Thornton which stood the principle that all law remains until it is repealed.

As Holt, CJ, said in Ashby v. White : "If the plaintiff has a right, he must of necessity have a means to vindicate and maintain it and a remedy if he is injured in the exercise or enjoyment of it; and indeed it is a vain thing to imagine a right without a remedy, for want of right and want of remedy are reciprocal."

0 Comments:

Post a comment

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares