|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Roy on 01:17 PM May 7th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Somehow I didn't see this as having much at all to do with the men's rights movement; rather, it seems to be a story about how the people in one small Wales U.K. electoral district rebelled against their political party's arrogance.
The real war against men in Britian continues unabated through the sexist prosecution of the domestic violence industry and recently expanded powers to criminalize men without due process in court.
Note in the info below that new U.K. DV laws allow a Restraining Order to be issued against any man accused of a DV offense, AND against any man who has been proved INNOCENT of said alleged offense.
Also the IDVA's -- Independent Domestic Violence Advisors -- are actually prosecutors who take over the case from the "victim," and ensure that no charges will be dropped, even if the "victim" says she lied, or wishes to get the State out of her life.
The Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004:
The plan sets out 5 key Government goals for the coming year:
* reducing the prevalence of domestic violence
* increasing the rate that domestic violence is reported
* increasing the rate of domestic violence offences that are brought to justice
* ensuring victims of domestic violence are adequately protected and supported nationwide
* reducing the number of domestic violence related homicides.
Reinforcing the plan, front-line service providers and stakeholders have been invited to come together at a series of seminars organised in conjunction with Women's Aid. These seminars will cover the full range of powers that have been recently introduced, and the role of the independent domestic violence advisors (IVDAs) in delivering effective services to victims of domestic violence. IVDAs effectively 'walk' beside the victim through the process, providing one point of contact both inside and outside the criminal justice system for the duration of a case and are key to gaining and sustaining victim confidence. Independent Domestic Violence Advisors (IVDAs) were previously referred to as “advocates.”
The Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 introduced new powers for the police and courts to deal with offenders, while bolstering support and protection that victims receive.
* Stronger legal protection for victims of domestic violence by enabling courts to impose restraining orders when sentencing for any offence. Until now, such orders could only be imposed on offenders convicted of harassment or causing fear of violence.
* Enabling courts to impose restraining orders on acquittal for any offence (or if a conviction has been overturned on appeal) if they consider it necessary to protect the victim from harassment. This will deal with cases where the conviction has failed but it is still clear from the evidence that the victims need protecting.
Link at - http://www.crimereduction.gov.uk/domesticviolence5 1.htm
"It's a terrible thing ... to be living in fear."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 11:33 AM May 8th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the interesting info. Your geeky tagline makes me jerk, btw ;).
So is the UK heading down the same road the US now, with a biased court system to be put into place? And are groups like Fathers4Justice aware of this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:29 PM May 8th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
This domestic violence law shows contempt for men's human rights. I hope it gets tossed.
But still, enjoy savoring the small victory of a courageous man fighting against femifascist dictators.
Law, who secured over 20,000 votes, defied brain surgery to run in the election.
Peter Law, thank you for your determination and effort to build a democracy in which men are not second-class citizens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tony Blair's Labour Party used women only shortlists to select candidates between 1993-97 before the party fell foul of a legal challenge.
The High Court declared Labour's action to be illegal.
Their use produced 35 of the 65 women elected to stand for the first time.
Hence we then had 35 illegal female MP's in the Commons.
Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:
"All human beings are born equal in dignity and rights."
Surely a Law which allows men to be excluded from short-lists of parliamentary candidates, and presumably other short-lists also,
Just because they are men
must violate this article. It is also an extreme form of sexism.
On 17th Oct 2001 the Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Bill was introduced into the House of Commons.
Very speedily it had its second reading on 24th Oct 2001
its committee stage on 6-8th Nov 2001
and its third reading on 14th Nov 2001
It took the House of Commons only 28 days to deprive Britains 35 million men and boys of their absolute right to be parliamentary candidates on reaching the age of majority, a right which they had had for 116 years since the reform Act of 1885.
The intention to introduce such legislation was not mentioned at all during the General Election on 7th June 2001
by any Labour candidate
or in the Labour Party's manifesto,
so that men who voted for the Labour Party during that election were unaware that they intended to begin excluding men from parliamentary and perhaps other, short-lists.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Rob writes "Fantastic news! British electorate today