3 ms·

Amnesty has the same access as the rest of the public.

by LegitShady 6y ago

mlthoughts2018 6y ago
No, the article explains their remote access was revoked (unlike many other public observers).
- LegitShady 6y ago
  >We've made 3 applications requesting recognition as expert fair trial monitors. Judge states that no 'special provision' will be made for our trial monitor's attendance,” They requested they get special status as "fair trial monitors". The judge said they get treated like everyone else. They should have no better access than you or I. They are nobody - a group that got together to push their agenda. They have no standing in court different from any other member of the public. They can monitor the trial without some special recognition.
  - mlthoughts2018 6y ago
    > “ They can monitor the trial without some special recognition.” No, their remote access request was denied. This is separate from any request for standing as an expert trial observer (which is a whole other can of worms).
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- cmiles74 6y ago
  I would be interested to read anything that confirms that some observers have been allowed to view the proceedings remotely. My understanding is that observers would need to have either one of the four available seats in the public gallery or a seat in the "overflow" rooms next to the court. Please note that the audio in the overflow room is reportedly very poor, what little I've read made it sound unreliable. If some observers were allowed remote access, I think that is important.
cmiles74 6y ago
There are only four seats available in the public gallery, I believe. In the posted article Amnesty International states: "If Amnesty International and other observers wanted to attend the hearing, they would have to queue for one of the four seats available in a public gallery." I believe the gallery seats 40 but only four are available because of their rules on social distancing.

3 ms·

Amnesty has the same access as the rest of the public.

by LegitShady 6y ago

Amnesty has the same access as the rest of the public.

mlthoughts2018 6y ago
No, the article explains their remote access was revoked (unlike many other public observers).
- LegitShady 6y ago
  >We've made 3 applications requesting recognition as expert fair trial monitors. Judge states that no 'special provision' will be made for our trial monitor's attendance,” They requested they get special status as "fair trial monitors". The judge said they get treated like everyone else. They should have no better access than you or I. They are nobody - a group that got together to push their agenda. They have no standing in court different from any other member of the public. They can monitor the trial without some special recognition.
  - mlthoughts2018 6y ago
    > “ They can monitor the trial without some special recognition.” No, their remote access request was denied. This is separate from any request for standing as an expert trial observer (which is a whole other can of worms).
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- cmiles74 6y ago
  I would be interested to read anything that confirms that some observers have been allowed to view the proceedings remotely. My understanding is that observers would need to have either one of the four available seats in the public gallery or a seat in the "overflow" rooms next to the court. Please note that the audio in the overflow room is reportedly very poor, what little I've read made it sound unreliable. If some observers were allowed remote access, I think that is important.
cmiles74 6y ago
There are only four seats available in the public gallery, I believe. In the posted article Amnesty International states: "If Amnesty International and other observers wanted to attend the hearing, they would have to queue for one of the four seats available in a public gallery." I believe the gallery seats 40 but only four are available because of their rules on social distancing.