All men are created equal before the interwebs
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/06/internet-a-human-right/
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/17session/A.HRC.17.27_en.pdf
A UN report has indirectly declared internet access a human right , i dont have time to read it with exams coming but i’v been saying for years that internet access will eventually be a human right. Keep in mind this is not a ‘fundamental declaration of rights’ right but a right under Treaty jurisprudence applicable only in a certain sitaution.
So no : you cannot sue daddy for taking away your 100mbit connection. It doesnt work that way- maybe in 50 years it will.
The suggestion of a referendum on the Privy council and Gay rights
It makes logical and legal sense to have a referendum for the privy council’s adoption : it will allow the government an opportunity to galvanize and educate the public in support of a change to the Court system .The court system is the 3rd branch of government and the guardian of their rights, the people have a say in how their rights are to be treated.
In short , they have a right to vote on their own rights.
However this is not true for the debate on equal rights for LGBT persons : There is no right to decide the rights of other people especially a minority group. It goes against the constitution itself ( Right to Equality) and against hundreds of years of political science and philosophy.
The interpretation of what human rights mean is a complex process, but it is a process to be decided by impartial bodies such as the courts and international tribunals. The modern concept of Human Rights was largely created by the UN in the Declaration of the Rights of Man in 1948. The UN human rights committee has already decided Non discrimination and equality means equal rights for LGBT persons :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toonen_v._Australia
The wealth of international case shows that once you have the right to Equality protected in the constitution , Equality means Equal rights for LGBT persons as well.
So the result of any referendum on LGBT rights is unnecessary . It is also a principle of Human Rights (and common sense) that a Majority must never decide the rights of a minority.
This happened in Nazi Germany : First they came for the gays , then the jews and gypsies , then those with deformities all because the masses supported Hitler.
Once you strengthen the rights of one group you strengthen all.
And i must reiterate again : The gay rights movement in Trinbago is not for ‘marriage’ , that is a debate only relevant to the USA. It is at present legal in theory to fire someone from their job for being gay , and gays are not given equal protection against domestic violence etc.
http://www.stabroeknews.com/2012/news/stories/05/06/catholics-must-challenge-laws-that-promote-discrimination-%E2%80%93-aec-president/
As a catholic i’m glad when my own political views intersect with what the dude in rome says.
If anyone has not seen my thesis on Human rights law applied to LGBT rights, or doubts that i have read extensively on this issue and got a good grade for my for doing so please see here : http://works.bepress.com/jonathan_bhagan/1/ .
International law and human rights law is my thing. Most of my As and Bs are in human rights /international law courses. My Ds are in courses i fell asleep in the exam room for , long story- but basically never try to bring sleeping meds into Barbados without a perscription. Customs and immigration will sieze and destroy them.
Thought Experment : Reperations for slavery and colonialism from the perspective of the Law of Damages and Causation (Tort)
Studying the Law of Remedies and damages has lead to an interesting crossover in my mind. This branch of law deals with negligence and harms done that may be remedied by court action. The general ‘remedy’ is money , and the measure of money is found by a variety of principles -
one of them the Restitutio in integrum principle that the claimant must be put back in the position he was before the harm occurred.
While the common law of damages does not apply in any real way to the debate on Reparations , there is some benefit in looking at the situation from this paradigm. For one it explains why all the african-americans in the US (or any common law nation) can’t come forward with a class action law suit against former slave owning families and corporations for the harms of slavery.
Let me say here in advance : I do believe that Colonialism is directly responsible for the state of the African continent - having destroyed whole nations and civilizations over hundreds of years. The descendants of slaves in the west are still affected by the legacy of slavery. The destruction of traditional african values and the family unit in by slavery can be seen today - especially in the caribbean .
I remember having a debate with my friends at the USC debating society , Jean Claude Cournand , Angelo Hart , Adali Baisden , Brandon O’brien etc. The conclusion was (if i remember correctly) that african people in the west have spent more time being slaves than being free and slavery is still attributable for the social ills associated with blacks.
Thus i do believe European nations and old money families who owned slaves owe african peoples reparations for the damage done - damage that still is felt today. I do believe they also owe India , China and all the nations they abused in their rise to power. ( i am mixed with every major ethnic group so i have a vested interest in all these debates) .
So onto my thought experiment :
Many problems arise if you try to apply the rigid standards of law to the debate of reparations . Since the basic measure of damages is ‘putting the claimant back in the position he was in before the harm occurred’ How does one go about finding the ‘original state’ of Africa’s wealth in the 15th and 16th centuries? (whenever the trans-atlantic salve trade started - i’m no historian) .
How does one measure the value of a Civilization and culture - and a homeland?
There are many other aspects of damages to consider as well - Exemplary or Punitive damages would seek to punish wrongdoers for doing highly immoral acts. Chattel slavery probably the most immoral thing in modern history - The Jewish holocaust being one of the few other incidents that could begin to match the trans atlantic slave trade + the horrors experienced by slaves in the new world. (without prejudice to anyone’s ethnicity - i remember an uproar in Cavehill when Dr. Berry compared the holocaust to slavery )
Exemplary damages are a ‘peculiar feature of the common law’ (as said in one of the Trinidad Cement caes before the CCJ ) and not seen in international law or other legal systems such as the french ‘Civil Code’- so it may be a stretch for them to actually be given if such a claim did occur.
So how much money can compensate for one of the most immoral acts in history? 100 billion ? 1 Trillion? Do you also charge interest for ‘being kept out of monies owed to you’ over the hundreds of years since slavery ended? Do you demand a lump sum or payments in installments?
One more aspect that would be looked at : the issue of causation . There are several principles used to establish causation but generally if the damage that occurred was ‘reasonably foreseeable’ then causation can be founded. However the law sets limits on ‘foreseeability’ and causation by principles relating to the remoteness of damage ,which is best explained by reference to a case :
Bourhill v Young [1943] AC 92 is a Scottish delict case, on the subject of how extensive an individual’s duty is to ensure others are not harmed by their activities. The case established important boundaries on the scope of recovery for bystanders, or those uninvolved with physical harm. Where a woman suffered psychiatric harm after walking onto the scene of a motorcycle accident, she was deemed not to be a foreseeable victim, having not been in immediate danger of physical harm.
Facts
On the 11th of October, 1938, Mr Young had been negligently riding a motorcycle along a road, and was involved in a collision with a car, fatally injuring him. At the time of the crash, Mrs Bourhill was about to leave a tram which she had been riding, around 50 ft from the scene of the accident. Mrs Bourhill heard the crash, commenting “I just got in a pack of nerves, and I did not know whether I was going to get it or not.”[1] Following the removal of Mr Young’s body from the road, she approached the scene of the accident, seeing the blood remaining from the crash. Mrs Bourhill, at the time eight months pregnant, later gave birth to a stillborn child, and claimed she had suffered nervous shock, stress and sustained loss due to Mr Young.[2]
Applying these principles to the debate on reparations : it can be said that slavery and colonialism is a direct cause of much of the social ills and poverty plaguing Africa and african peoples in the west - but where would you draw the line?
The debate can get quite interesting from this perspective as you can see - its a debate that is worth exploring (perhaps by law students - Maybe in future Remedies law classes so that we dont fall asleep).
( This post is merely me musing on the impact of colonialism and slavery from a different perspective. I do not intend to offend or insult any group - but the nature of my political positions is generally offensive so i do apologize in advance. I also apologize for my grammar- no time to edit)
addendum : a foreseeable counterargument to all this is that the European Union is the largest donar of aid in the world (last time i checked) and the US and England also give generously - so do these constitute reparations - or another moral obligation?
HOSS the caribbean court of justice
Word is it that the Kamla administration is moving forward with abolishing the privy council and establishing the CCJ as the highest court of appeal for criminal matters.
One step closer to regional integration and a good day for both lawyers and citizens- Having appeals to the CCJ instead of the privy council will make a final appeal much more affordable for the average man.
It will also mean more work for lawyers- more money for me # winning.
A very good move by the present administration - my criticism of them generally as been alot of good talented diluted by alot of idiots + general inexperience.
I heard a certain member of government was declared persona non grata in brazil… Basically it means he can never set foot in Brazil again . Normal procedure is to sack someone who is stupid enough to achieve that status- but that government minister is still in office. (total douchebag i hear too).
“The human Heart is now documented as the strongest generator of both electrical and magnetic fields in the body. This is important because we’ve always been taught that the brain is where all of the action is. While the brain does have an electrical and a magnetic field, they are both relatively weak compared to the Heart.
The Heart is about 100,000 times stronger electrically and up to 5,000 times stronger magnetically than the brain. The physical world—as we know it—is made of those 2 fields: electrical and magnetic fields of Energy.Physics now tells us that if we can change either the magnetic field or the electrical field of the atom, we literally change that atom and its elements within our body and this world. The human Heart is designed to do BOTH.”
- David Math, TruSparta
(Source: theawakenedstate)
the penis:
the greatest weapon
I will never wield; insteadGod gave me
a sheath for wicked men’s naked swords.
I walk out
in dark cloak night
wary that some dirty-minded man will once will me
a scabbard for his disease-ridden daggersometimes…
what Disney princesses would look like in real life
Love the Jane one
reblogging because Jane is a babe
^^
Via Super Nerrd
the penis:
the greatest weapon
I will never wield; insteadGod gave me
a sheath for wicked men’s naked swords.
I walk out
in dark cloak night
wary that some dirty-minded man will once will me
a scabbard for his disease-ridden daggersometimes…
You broke Stephen.
This is why Dan Savage is my god.
(Source: greatdayforamerica)
Via Split the Heavens


