Share this page!

Adam Wagner Profile picture
Twitter logo
17 Nov, 4 tweets, 1 min read
I know people don't like Insulate Britain's tactics but we also need to consider 'persons unknown' injunctions are a kind of private criminal law system available to companies and public authorities who get to draft laws (if approved by courts) and then bring private prosecutions
This is fundamentally different to our democratically elected lawmakers voting in new criminal laws through parliamentary process. Injunctions are usually unopposed, little or no debate over the impact on rights to protest, sentences of up to 2 years imprisonment if you breach
The reality is that parliament's approach to obstructing the highway has been that prison sentences are not available. Rather than change the law through parliament, the department of transport obtained a private injunction.
You may think that's all well and good because Insulate Britain needed to be stopped from blocking highways, I am not commenting there, but this is in a sense a subversion of the usual way criminal laws are developed and we should face up to that too.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Adam Wagner

Adam Wagner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AdamWagner1

Adam Wagner Profile picture
19 Nov
A law which should strike fear into any dual national or those who can obtain alternative citizenship (including Jewish people so me). Arendt said there could be no human rights without citizenship - the “right to have rights”. It should *never* be removed without due process
Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
“Everyone has the right to a nationality. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.”
This is the new Clause 9 of the Nationality and Borders Bill. Allows the Home Secretary to avoid giving notice of stripping somebody of citizenship, also known as civic death, if “it would for any other reason not be reasonably practicable to give notice” publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill… Image
Read 4 tweets
Adam Wagner Profile picture
18 Nov
The statements Azeem Rafiq made 10 years ago were plainly antisemitic. He has apologised. That issue (which arose I guess because of increased scrutiny from being a whistleblower) has no bearing at all on the *truth* or *implications* of the racism he experienced.
The world is complicated. eg. there are Jews who are racist and also experience inexcusable antisemitism. I think it is up to every person to face up to their own prejudices (which it sounds like Rafiq is doing) but nobody deserves to have their dignity violated in the way he has
I think social media has made us so personality focussed - obsessed - that we find it difficult to separate the person from the points they are making. I hope that this "revelation" doesn't undermine any of the important lessons we need to learn from his experiences.
Read 4 tweets
Adam Wagner Profile picture
17 Nov
This is a huge moment - the first time, as far as I know, that non-violent protesters have been imprisoned for contempt of court after breaching a 'persons unknown' injunction. I hope they appeal
* hope they appeal to ensure that the higher courts review the freedom of speech elements of these sentences. I am not condoning the protest tactics (or making any comment), but this is an important moment legally which shouldn't be swept up in public anger
My concerns about the injunctions which have been breached
Read 11 tweets
Adam Wagner Profile picture
3 Nov
The most simple definition of the rule of law is that those who make the law are also bound by it

It is an obvious breach of that principle when lawmakers choose to change the law (parliamentary standards rules) to protect a lawmaker who has already been found in breach of them
The fact that the rule and findings in question relate to corruption, and the change will protect an individual from findings of corruption, goes to show how serious a breach of the rule of law this is.
And the worst part is that internal parliamentary anti-corruption rules are *entirely* the responsibility of parliament. The Bill of Rights 1689 likely prevents any court challenge, so this is the end of the matter, subject to public stink.
Read 7 tweets
Adam Wagner Profile picture
22 Oct
Exactly, political is not something that can be distilled like a chemical and taken away from important legal decisions. We should not be concerned about politics but about the separation of powers between the executive, judiciary, and legislature
Politics is just what the public and politicians are concerned about at any particular moment. It is a movable feast. Courts exist to interpret the law of the land, they should not have to also interpret an indefinable and shape shifting concept of “politics“
Issues come in and out of public interest, for example whilst the Covid regulations may now be considered highly politically sensitive, in a couple of years they may not be, but the law itself has not altered and the court’s role should not either
Read 11 tweets
Adam Wagner Profile picture
15 Oct
I find it pretty dumbfounding, if correct, that MPs do not as a matter of course have security protection at constituency surgeries
What is the issue? Cost? Perception that members of the public might be intimidated? It seems old-fashioned and (unfortunately) not fit for the modern world.

In the US, as far as I know, members of congress have security protection
As strange as this might sound, MPs are in quite a weak position legally. They are not employees so can't sue an employer for rights, Parliament is pretty much immune from legal remedies anyway because of the Bill of Rights
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

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

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/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

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @AdamWagner1 has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @AdamWagner1!

Read all threads by @AdamWagner1

:(