4 ms·
> or have to justify reasons for its decisions. Whoa. What kind of a tribunal is that? This is dystopian beyond words. Even in the fifties, the most outrageou
by weland 13y ago
> or have to justify reasons for its decisions.
Whoa. What kind of a tribunal is that?
This is dystopian beyond words. Even in the fifties, the most outrageous, crime-filed years of communism, the People's Tribunals still justified their decisions. It was a facade -- everyone knew it was bollocks -- but all decisions were motivated.
I get private hearings (e.g. for security reasons, both the state's and the personal security of those who participate in them); they are used in many countries. But not having to publish a motivation for a decision, that's... beyond words.
- Joeboy 13y ago> Whoa. What kind of a tribunal is that? "in the period 2000 to 2009, five out of at least 956 complaints made have been upheld", says https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Tribunal#Cases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Tribunal#... A bunch of women who were conned into having relationships with, and in some cases having the children of, undercover police officers are currently fighting a case behind closed doors in the IPT, which presumably will not find in their favour. I imagine the IPT's purpose is to present an additional obstacle before they can go to the European Court of Human Rights. It's fucked up.
- mtgx 13y agoYeah, I don't get it. So they are going to argue against secret laws, at at ... secret tribunal? That seems very hopeless to me.