Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #openjustice

Most recents (5)

At my tribunal the Judge welcomed live tweeting as a means of #openjustice . It was brilliantly done by @wwwritingclub. Someone didn't like something she reported and complained to @Twitter. Her account was suspended for 12 hrs. She wasn't able to live tweet from #FairCopJR
Someone also did not like that the women of Mumsnet were talking openly about the case and the individuals involved. They received ominous warnings about "reporting restrictions" and decided to take all the names out if the posts to be on the safe side mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_ri…
After clarification that there were no reporting restrictions they have promised to replace all the names.
Read 7 tweets
Welcome back! The final session of the case against Boris Johnson closing down Parliament is starting at the Supreme Court. Lord Keen, the government's top law man in Scotland, begins his reply to the week's legal argument.
Lord Keen says that the entire case against the government is, quite simply, wrong because prorogation of Parliament is a political rather than legal issue.
Lord Keen: "What this court is being invited to do is control the length of the prorogation of Parliament... The length of each session of Parliament and their frequency are regulated by constitutional convention - not the law."
Read 27 tweets
And we've started. First up, James Woolfe QC. He's the Scottish government's Lord Advocate - that's its top legal adviser. He's got 30 minutes to make an intervention on its behalf.
Typo. James Wolffe QC, with a double f. Apols.
Mr Wolffe is arguing that the court needs to "calibrate" its approach to holding ministers to account in relation to the importance of the issue before them. The more serious the issue, the more important it is that courts looks into it.
Read 15 tweets
Sir James Eadie QC has finished his submissions for the Prime Minister in defence of the case brought by Gina Miller. Lord David Pannick QC now has the right to reply.
In summary, David Pannick says he’s asking the court to declare that the proroguement of five weeks, in the specific context of current events, is an abuse of power because it breaches Parliamentary sovereignty at a moment when “time is of the essence” over Brexit.
If the PM loses, he would then be required to retake his decision over the duration of a prorogation and take into account what the judges say abiout Parliamentary sovereignty. Pannick is not asking the judges to set out how long a prorogation should be.
Read 7 tweets
David Beckham is being dealt with tomorrow for driving while on the phone under the Single Justice Procedure - behind closed doors & under a blanket of secrecy. It's a system @HMCTSgovuk and @MoJGovUK want to roll out more widely, but is an affront to #OpenJustice at the moment:
Beckham's case does not appear on the court list issued to journalists in advance. So presumably all other SJP cases are also not listed. We have long since stopped receiving the outcomes of SJP cases from courts in London.
At best we can find out whether Beckham pleads guilty, and if he does, his punishment. But unlike all other court cases where there's an actual hearing, we'll never know the circumstances of the offence, mitigation offered by the defendant, and why the punishment was reached.
Read 9 tweets

Related hashtags

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!