There is a holocaust in progress as we speak:

The treatment of refugees is the skeleton key to a global holocaust targeting traditional peoples and developing nations. But no one is "safe".

Minister for Justice' slanderous comments re: judicial review litigants

RESPONSE to the Irish Times of 31 May 2010:

The Minister is not objective:
The Minister for Justice is himself Respondent in all asylum judicial reviews (otherwise known as Defendant.)

His irresponsible comments in the Irish Times on Monday 31 May 2010 are therefore not disinterested or objective.

The Minister for Justice is himself implicated in a formal Complaint of judges’ corruption in asylum judicial review.

(That is, the Minister is the Respondent who prospered allegedly due to tampering with judges.)

The Minister is directly responsible for overburdening the courts:
The reason the asylum section is overburdened is that the Refugee Appeals Tribunal (RAT) is an assembly line of continual flawed decisions. Flagrant corruption at RAT has been exposed in open court, and criticized throughout the legal profession.

(See Richard Nyembo v RAT & James Nicholson High Court #895-2004; and “Box 4: The Case of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal” in Justice Matters (2007 report by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties.)


The Superior Courts have done nothing to correct this, but allow cynical legalistic practices which let it go on and on: in cases concerning life or death, international war crimes and genocide.

This overburdening of the courts is a tactic by the Ministry for Justice (which, contrary to all fairness criteria, oversees the body which examines its own decisions.)

The resulting excessive caseload is frequently cited by judges as the reason that they don’t have time to give these questions of human life or death the anxious scrutiny which international human rights law requires.



The Ministry is fundamentally unfit for any role in refugee matters:
The Ministry for Justice (that is, law enforcement / the police) is that branch of government which is most often the perpetrator in the human rights violations which have turned 17 million people into refugees worldwide. It is the only branch of government in Ireland which has been found culpable itself in such human rights violations.

The Ministry for Justice works closely with the CIA: an agency notorious for such crimes all over the world.

As many organizations and experts in refugee issues have decried:
The Ministry for Justice should have nothing to do with refugees.

Respectfully,
Grace L
Plaintiff
Complaint of Unethical Misconduct in Judges of the Superior Courts.

SUMMARY March 2010

Their word is law

and

they're out of control!

Judges of the High Court and Supreme Court are the one branch of the State which has so far escaped public inquiry into alleged misconduct.

Such allegations exist. Article 35.4 of the Constitution charges the Dail and Seanad to provide redress against such judges' violations.

The European Convention on Human Rights ("ECHR") Articles 6 and 13 also obliges the State to provide "an effective remedy" "within a reasonable time" "by an independent and impartial tribunal" for such violations.

What do members of the Dail and Seanad do when they receive a formal complaint of unethical misconduct against judges of the

High Court or Supreme Court?

N O T H I N G . . . ? ? ?

Do members of the Dial and Seanad routinely ignore such formal complaints against judges which come to their attention?

If members of the Dail and Seanad fail / neglect / refuse to act on such complaints, there is no accountability for High Court and Supreme Court judges who violate their oath of office.

This lack of accountability in the judiciary renders Ireland's entire legal code a dead letter: because the law is only what the High Court or Supreme Court judge says it is.

This failure of accountability has incalculable cost in the erosion of justice, democracy and the rule of law.

It has played a role in recent notorious cases such as

Ø the giveaway of billions in national resources to foreign companies at Rossport;

Ø suspicious deaths in custody;

Ø Garda scandals;

Ø the case of Veronica Guerin and other victims of organized crime;

Ø CIA torture flights at Shannon airport; and

Ø countless cases where State actions are adjudicated by the courts

(a branch of the State itself.)

The Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) and the Committee on Judicial Conduct call for the creation of a body to handle ethics complaints against judges "as a matter of urgency."

PLEASE DEMAND IMMEDIATE DAIL & SEANAD ACTION / MOTIONS

ON ALL OUTSTANDING COMPLAINTS AGAINST

HIGH COURT AND SUPREME COURT JUDGES.

T h i s i s w h a t h a p p e n e d i n m y c a s e

Refugee Appeals Tribunal ("RAT") admits bias and corruption in my case

In 2005, I was successful in my judicial review of the decision to refuse me asylum.

the Refugee Appeals Tribunal (RAT) agreed to vacate the decision on the grounds that:

Ø RAT was subject to disqualifying political bias in my case.

Ø RAT discriminated against applicatns from my country of origin,

Ø "rubber-stamping" all negative decisions in our cases,

Ø no matter what the evidence.

The High Court says RAT can decide my case anyway

Despite RAT's own admissions, the High Court sent my case back to this very same corrupt and biased inferior tribunal to decide my claim for asylum: a matter of my life or death.

Did judges cover up human rights abuse by government and their political allies? Despite

Ø risk to human life in my case;

Ø my successful judicial review of 2004-05;

Ø RAT's own admission of bias and corruption therein;

Ø RAT's second decision in my case almost identical to the first, discredited decision;

Ø recent public exposure of widespread corruption at RAT;

Ø outcry thereof through the legal profession;

Ø Council of Europe sanctions against Justice Ministry's cooperation in CIA human rights abuse;

Ø my case including a challenge to the validity of the statute under the Constitution and EU law;

Ø involving thousands of cases of risk to human life and international war crimes:

still High and Supreme Court judges refused to hear the case.

What happens when High Court or Supreme Court judges violate their oath of office?

N O T H I N G . . . ? ? ?

Article 35.4 of the Constitution designates that only the Dáil and Seanad have responsibility to addrss cases of unethical misconduct by judges of the High Court and Supreme Court.

The Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) and the Committee on Judicial Conduct call for the creation of a body to handle ethics complaints against judges "as a matter of urgency."

View the formal Complaint against judges of the High Court and Supreme Court, and related information at: refugeejustice.blogspot.com

PLEASE CONTACT YOUR TD / SENATOR