Joined: Mar 05 2007 Posts: 13190 Location: Hedon (sometimes), sometimes Premier Inn's
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:Meanwhile in other news, Mafeking has been relieved.
Lucky him
'when my life is over, the thing which will have given me greatest pride is that I was first to plunge into the sea, swimming freely underwater without any connection to the terrestrial world'
Ferocious Aardvark wrote: the 30 September 2011 report to the Home Secretary by a Committee chaired by the Rt Hon Sir Scott Baker which actually reviewed the United Kingdom's extradition arrangements, and said that it was not aware of any cases in which EAWs issued by designated prosecuting authorities has led to oppression or injustice.
What kind of naive thinking leads someone to think our laws shouldnt build in protections against possibilities 'which might be' an abuse of process?
What kind of nonsense are you arguing here? That because something hasnt happened, it can never happen and we should forget about it as a possibility? That because it hasnt been used to lead to provable cases of oppression or injustice it never ever could be?
You obviously didn't notice that I was referring not directly to my own argument, but to the 30 September 2011 report to the Home Secretary by a Committee chaired by the Rt Hon Sir Scott Baker which reviewed the United Kingdom's extradition arrangements, and made those findings.
To me, they seem rational and compelling. But if you want to know what kind of nonsense is being argued, why don't you drop a line to Sir Scott Baker? I'm sure he'd be bowled over by your insight.
Last edited by Ferocious Aardvark on stardate Jun 26, 3013 11:27 am, edited 48,562,867,458,300,023 times in total
Joined: Feb 17 2002 Posts: 28357 Location: MACS0647-JD
Curiously Call me Dave seems to have perhaps become exasperated by the EAW, as he indicated during a trade visit to Brazil last week (the perfect forum, obviously) that the government intends to exercise its opt-out powers to opt out of all of the police and criminal justice measures adopted under the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht - including therefore the EAW - "before the end of the year".
The government has until the end of May 2014 to notify the European Commission of any decision to opt out.
But what a mess! For starters, any opt-out can relate only to measures established before the Treaty of Lisbon came into force in 2009, so there's a splendid recipe for confusion.
Did I miss the Consultation which will obviously have been assiduously carried out on such fundamental measures?
Last edited by Ferocious Aardvark on stardate Jun 26, 3013 11:27 am, edited 48,562,867,458,300,023 times in total
Joined: Oct 19 2003 Posts: 17898 Location: Packed like sardines, in a tin
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:Curiously Call me Dave seems to have perhaps become exasperated by the EAW, as he indicated during a trade visit to Brazil last week (the perfect forum, obviously) that the government intends to exercise its opt-out powers to opt out of all of the police and criminal justice measures adopted under the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht - including therefore the EAW - "before the end of the year".
The government has until the end of May 2014 to notify the European Commission of any decision to opt out.
But what a mess! For starters, any opt-out can relate only to measures established before the Treaty of Lisbon came into force in 2009, so there's a splendid recipe for confusion.
Did I miss the Consultation which will obviously have been assiduously carried out on such fundamental measures?
If we opt out of EAW, how would we get future naughty teachers back from France? Or is it one of these "one way" opt outs?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 135 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
