Iraq War - conflict ILLEGAL by ex-Law Lord Bingham

(Click Here) - Daily Mail article by Ian Drury 18/11/08 Straw defends his role in the Iraq War after ex-Law Lord brands conflict Illegal

Lord Bingham:
...
"In fact, he said, UN resolution 1441 - which ministers claimed justified military action - was 'not an express further decision to authorise force'."
...
"Critics have said that Mr Blair had already made up his mind to commit troops to support US President George W. Bush in Iraq.

But he was desperately seeking a legal justification to avoid the sceptical UN Security Council making the final decision on an attack against Saddam.

Lord Bingham said: 'This statement was flawed in two fundamental respects.
'First, it was not plain that Iraq had failed to comply in a manner justifying resort to force and there were no strong factual grounds or hard evidence to show it had.

'Hans Blix and his team of weapons inspectors had found no weapons of mass destruction, were making progress and expected to complete their task in a matter of months.

'Secondly, it passes belief that a determination whether Iraq had failed to avail itself of its final opportunity was intended to be taken otherwise than collectively by the Security Council.'

He said: 'If I am right that the invasion of Iraq by the US, the UK and some other states was unauthorised by the Security Council there was, of course, a serious violation of international law and of the rule of law.'"
...
Well, Lord Bingham ought to be capable of making a succinct judgment on specific "express" wording - it is never too late in that regard.

The best thing we can do is apologise, make the reparation payments and learn valuable lessons, remove troops: as many many people have been hoodwinked under Blair, are "smart-thinking" their way through life being merely clever but not intelligent - there is a material difference. To my mind, the Iraq war was a decoy for an invasion of a concept known as ADR (which has a darker side to it) that hit UK/European shores and has upset the "natural" world order based on the opposites: the damage being done is a consequence of that effect, the sooner we get back to our "good" nature, the better.

----

Incidentally, the folks doing Christmas Carols to highlight the plight of the alleged "Holy Land" - good for you - sometimes reality shocks and hits home: the papers suggested that it would be offensive, not to me: what is offensive is that we are all supposedly descended from Abraham (in a spiritual and/or religious sense) and are at each others throats in this region of the world. Balance and harmony/reciprocity and mutuality - it does not cost anything at all. Christ's message was "love. For those who identify with Christ and are suffering, the real issue is "unequal" in society, who put that cross on your back? - find a way to obtain assistance to put the issues back where they justly belong.

---

Mr Brown, £100 billion borrowing - from who? Perhaps you need advice from a volunteer generalist adviser at Citizen Advice Bureau who can give you a debt pack - and possibly access to LILA!

- Check out the Charity shops - kids books/toys are a couple of quid max and there is usually nothing wrong with them whatsoever
- Arts and crafts books will solve all your Xmas pressies - have a go
- Do an oil painting it can't be any worse than you did in nursery school.
- Feng Shui the home: de-clutter, re-arrange things more aesethetically, fix the broken bits (it saves lots of money and you can make a list of items that you really really do need/want - and don't be afraid to give away items that other people think you might like but you feel you have to keep them because ....!)
- Borrow the Feng Shui/Art & Craft book from the Library, where you might be surprised to find out you can borrow music and films (as well as join local groups if you are at all isolated or have nothing better to do!)
- Do a Tombola of Charity shop items or the local "Pound Store" - use a raffle ticket book and see what you can pick up for £'x' or 50/100 items - china tea sets, plant pots, books, cd's etc can be quite good fun and the money all goes to assist others - great for kids. (In Edinburgh there is a "Charity Shop Map of all charities located in Edinburgh" (OXFAM have them as do others)which is a weekend past-time up here allegedly).

Create a "Bah Humbug" Christmas CD - any suggestions via comments (even anonymously) welcome! If you like, make non-Christmas references specific to ON A BUDGET / Bust / Xmas not happening in our house - no turkey!

It's lots of fun - set someone/a kid up as the DJ at the Party.

Happy Birthday to you, Happy Birthday to you, You look like a ... Happy Birthday to you!

60 Today

The Judge's Woolsack - should it be vacant

(Click Here) The Woolsack in the House of Lords

Who is head of the judiciary as Lord Chancellor these days? Is there a vacancy and will a "virtual woolsack" make do via a legal secretary and ex fee earner paralegal having a very real ability in Jurisprudence (even although the PM these days is not doing "prudence"). I did apply for the Bar 4 times and for some unknown reason was rejected 4 times!

Where is the executive function in the cabinet that only a Judge can have - head up the judiciary and have a political post in the Cabinet.

Why and when did we create the position of "Justice Secretary" and further why is that post held by a Lord on the political fence, not the judicial fence or why is the political within the judiciary and not the judiciary within the political - change managed something!

Separation of the powers - I recall Romano Prodi who headed up the EU had a little chat about that topic some years ago.

I did also see in Hansard (Click Here) Quotes on the Woolf Reforms that Lord Mackay of Clashfern notified that the Access to Justice Bill was dealt with via the "Despatch Box" and not the Woolsack - can someone clarify the reason for this, was it a one-off or are we doing something different these days and why?

Silence and observation

In law "silence" is a powerful tool. Sometimes you can win the argument just by being silent. The Respondent's representations are so obviously incorrect/false you don't need to make any comment by stating the fact - so you just leave the issue hanging there in the ether.

I can give you an example: in my first hearing on the Masons action posted on this blog. I was asked by the Judge to focus on the transfer. So I said "oh all right then, what authority did you use to transfer me". Respondents witness, a senior managing partner (Tony Bunch), informed "the contract". I then asked, "which clause in the contract be specific" - Silence. The falsehood became apparent by the partner's inability to represent himself because he would then have gone completely against his barrister drafted pleading (Bruce Carr, Devereux Chambers) which was attempting to mislead the court that the job title was relevant to there being no need to request or receive bilateral consent to a transfer because it was a management decision (and therefore not based on contract law (and the history of the contract over time, ie custom) - lawyers should know better to always check the contract!, Professor Richard Susskind OBE was attempting to unilaterally impose a transfer rather than deal with incompetence in the firm, he thereby deliberately sacrificed myself.

Anyway, I have been silent this month, largely because I have also been quite busy and often tired.

I attended a Human Rights Conference in Berlin this month and participated in the working group "Inhumane Working Conditions and Labour Rights Violations". It was a very good conference and information will shortly be published on their website - which I will give a link to when the information becomes available. However, Professor Saskia Sasson might be worth reading - she appeared to me to be astute academically and mentioned a book.

Which brings me onto "observation":

Moral Bankruptcy - New Labour - spin, spin, spin (but why are they spinning!)
Legal Bankruptcy - Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR/Mediation) within the British judiciary and legal profession (undermines the rule of law), including Europe and my ongoing litigations - I am awaiting a court date!
Financial Bankruptcy - no surprises there then Greenspan!

Observing the media and questioning things:

Michael Mansfield QC: How did that Israeli Shoot to Kill policy manage to get into the British Police force - Cabinet - who is responsible and accountable then! The Brazilian case, had a right to life too. Look upwards.

Lord Mandelson and George Osborne: is this a non-story about "nonsense" to perhaps keep something more important off the front pages including a legal catastrophe by any chance! I am not quite evidentially sure yet, because I have really only glossed over this not very interesting front page story whether for the paltry sum of £50,000, the conservatives actually managed to receive it or not: if, and if not, why did this make front page news - for such a small sum! What have I potentially missed that was significantly more important!

David Blunkett MP is to return to Government, I haven't quite caught up with this one yet, but I am hoping they are not going to put him into the Ministry of Justice : "justice is blind". I am wondering how he managed to get Home Secretary and was that a honeytrap - the spooks must have been having a hoot! But maybe I am unkind, however, I have every right to be worried. Especially as no Police Officer is knocking on my door to get access to my case papers - unless those three little beetles I found in unusual places in my home mean anything sinister - if I am in anyway suspicious please let me know - intellectual espionage is another thing! especially as I appear to be a bit more intelligent than others/hopefully not the Home Office! in which case arrange a meeting directly.

Lord Straw is that a triple crown your wearing - Home Office, Foreign Office, Ministry of Justice - could Nostradamus be right! Somehow, Lord Woolf is not being held accountable or responsible nor Professor Richard Susskind OBE (or the law firms Masons and S J Berwin & Co) and I am now in year 13 in the English legal system and I still have not had "Justice" albeit there is an apparent legal system misguidely providing "access to justice" where the rule of law is never applied, "is applied when it is not even relevant" or "non-law(ADR)". Case citation does not appear on judgments, nor legal arguments, nor points of evidence etc, etc. Its called "organised crime" and is "corruption", its concerted, its orchestrated, is engineered, I know who is doing it and have informed those who are supposed to be responsible with authority: I sense there is an inability to "read" across the professional layers - but folks might be reading this blog! Just a pensive thought: the Lord Chancellor is traditionally a Judge who has Executive powers to sit in Parliament - when was Lord Straw a judge! Is this a "change managed" post or part of a regime change! Perhaps a "modern" concept and "contemporary lifestyle" under liberalisation and demoKratisation! Hopefully it is not dumbing down of judicial powers by any chance or even a Jewish conspiracy theory!

I recently referred Respondents' solicitors to the Law Society by email - Alison Parker and Paula Jefferson at Beachcrofts and referred to two others Marie Van Der Zyl and Susan Kelly on the previous litigation. I notify you of this fact, because the Law Society asked me to phone them, rather than dropping me a letter setting out how they were going to deal with matters or complaint form! I did not phone them, but I did contact Beachcrofts Senior Partner. No surprises then when I read on LegalWeek that "the former Senior Partner of Beachcrofts, Lord Hunt of Wirral, is set to lead a review on regulating the profession, the Law Society has announced today 14 October 2008". How did he manage to get that job then!, not that I would like to impute any impression or suggestion that his firm's conduct on my litigation has any bearing on his receiving this post "on merit", however, it is suspicious when his firm are referred to the Law Society and I am on appeal in the English courts because of the linking of Alison Parker's mens rea to Master Leslie's mens rea and they are both attempting to convince the appeal judge (who is not known yet) of their innocence on my case - professional codes of conduct aside - whilst it is appreciated that a lawyer's duty to the court is higher than their duty to their clients - I believe it is meant to protect them from unscrupulous respondents and where there is any harm threatened to themselves, friends, family and colleagues. As the only threat is being done for perverting the course of justice and misconduct in public office because they simply do not wish to settle this case, nor actually allow the case to be brought in court - I do wonder what Lord Hunt's "leading a review on regulating the profession" actually means - did you notify the Partnership that their equity was potentially at risk then!

I have created an alter ego cartoon character "Professor DisOBEdient" and have now coined another couple "Miss Behave", a legal secretary and "Miss Chief", a litigation paralegal - I know your enjoying reading the script (pleadings bundle) and seeing her war room in this virtual court.

As its Halloween, and I went to a party, this is a ditty from my childhood which always gets a scream:

Lord Nelson's Bad Eye

You blindfold the victim to awaken the senses:
A person sits in a chair. Props: a jacket sleeve, a broom shaft, a games shaker filled with ice cream and jelly or squishy liquid which is chilled.

You take the victim and ask them to meet Lord Nelson who is sitting in the chair.

You say: "This is Lord Nelson's good arm" and let the victim touch an arm with a jumper sleeve.
You then say: "This is Lord Nelson's bad arm" and let the victim either touch bare skin or a sleeve with no arm in it.

You say: "This is Lord Nelson's good leg" and let the victim touch your trousered leg
You then say: "This is Lord Nelson's bad leg" and either they touch a bare leg or a broom shaft

You say: "This is Lord Nelson's good eye" and they touch a person's eyelashes
You then say: "This is Lord Nelson's bad eye" and poke their fingers into the jelly and ice cream

Result : bloodcurdling scream - screech

When it works, it really works!