3 ms·
>but it's understandable why the UK might choose not to treat them as a privileged observer. Sounds more like a justifiable way of minimizing the legal support
by mywittyname 6y ago
>but it's understandable why the UK might choose not to treat them as a privileged observer.
Sounds more like a justifiable way of minimizing the legal support available to the defendant, and control the flow of information to the public.
- shadowgovt 6y agoThey're a charity and a private institution, not a legal arm of the UK, an oversight organization of the EU, or a division of the UN. They have as much legal authority as any other private institution. Not to say that it wouldn't be a good idea for AI to have the privilege of oversight of any court proceeding in the UK. But I believe such a thing would have to start as law from the Houses, not the discretion of an individual judge. If there is precedent to the contrary, I will stand corrected.
- k1m 6y agoAccording to Amnesty, "Amnesty International monitors have gone to Guantanamo Bay, Bahrain, Ecuador, Turkey, and Hungary, among many others, to observe trials as officially recognized fair trial monitors." - https://twitter.com/JuliaHall18/status/1306200278207782913 https://twitter.com/JuliaHall18/status/1306200278207782913 I guess it's too much to ask of the UK though.
- dependenttypes 6y ago> They're a charity and a private institution, not a legal arm of the UK Just like the Internet Watch Foundation. Being a private charity does not mean much for the UK.