Articles published in the popular press on the Julian Assange case, which was recently decided before the relevant United Nations body, have been both legally and morally problematic. They not only inaccurately portray the nature of international law, they ...
She petrified me,
I was fascinated, like snake prey, staring at one, upon the hypnotic eyes,
Or a cat in headlights. Screech, splat, there it was, that lifeless deflation, it had once been me.
She undulated and swayed, like an old pine tree,
My blood solidified, burning lava turned to tarring stone.
My inner organs liquefied, my stomach felt a little upset.
Her textures and curves and smoothness enchant,
As shadows dance upon her unholy nights.
She gave me a solid fright,
And turned my world 180 degrees. I ran right out of sight.
I turned and ran, I tried to fight,
But whenever I stopped for breath, there she stood,
Waiting for my eyes to droop,
She petrified me, as though I were a timid mouse before a blood-thirsting, readily curling snake.
Or a victim before Medusa and the furies,
She undulated, with serpentine hips,
I hold back, and search for an antidote,
But she approaches even when I dream,
And darkness and nightmares are her quiet rural streams.
And my eyes and neck spin and move as she lets loose her beat.
And she enjoys her own dance as she moves her feet.
And she'd delight if I fell truly into her trap, and fell into the darkest deep pits,
If I joined so many others, whom she controls with the empty hand movements with which she strikes and whips.
But I do not desire to be on unsteady ground, as she continues with countless others,
An illusionary muse. As she hits the floor in ever new dresses and shoes.
And delights at the countless captive men she nightly woos.
To fall for her... I'd only lose.
So I turn away, and leave her and her empty rhythmic noose.
And she dances, as though devils and sylphs let her loose.
Knowledge is a fickle spotlight. It opens the young, eager and ready human mind to the complex world, and enables a person of little sophistication to perform the vast feats of society's wise and ancient giants. By it, much is gained. By a lack of it - in a...
Articles published in the popular press on the Julian Assange case, which was recently decided before the relevant United Nations body, have been both legally and morally problematic. They not only inaccurately portray the nature of international law, they also create false impressions on aspects of the decision which adhere firmly to settled procedure. They also ignore that the body decides matters where freedom of movement is denied, which is how the body defines arbitrary detention.
The decision of the body is neither controversial or unexpected, nor is it much different from previous decisions, which in most cases have involved cases where outspoken individuals are arbitrarily detained, whether de facto or in an official sense. A de facto act is an act which in its effect is the equivalent of the legally acknowledged alternative to it. For example, threatening to arrest a person if they leave their home could still be construed as house arrest in the de facto sense, even if the house arrest is not officially called what it is. Exchange a house for an Ecuadorian embassy, and you have the logic of the Working Group, in the Assange matter.
You will notice that many articles, on the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention's decision, contain a phrase that they do not attribute to any legal expert. These newspaper articles state that the Working Group's decisions are not legally binding. Unfortunately, this is a case of gross journalistic incompetence. Those legally literate voices who have spoken up have confirmed that the finding of the Working Group, is binding in international law, to the same extent that decisions of other similar bodies are binding.
Britain and Sweden have both an international and a European duty and obligation to obey the findings of the commission and set Assange free. For instance, the Council of Europe's European Court of Human Rights, which is the regional court for human rights in Europe, holds the decisions of the working group to be authoritative. The working group itself exists as an agent of the United Nations' Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and is tasked with investigating and reporting on arbitrary deprivations on the right to freedom of movement.
The UN Working Group decision on Julian Assange is an opinion by authorised human rights experts. This is the sort of opinion nations generally follow. Much like decisions of the International Court of Justice, the decision interprets binding international laws, and does so with international moral authority. International Law interpretive bodies and tribunals all work in the same way. They give legal opinions, these opinions are binding internationally, but generally not directly in local law. Obviously, international tribunals cannot enforce the decisions they give, but this does not stop their decisions from being legally binding.
Britain should adhere to the decision, its refusal is a serious, and public breach of international human rights laws. Usually, failure to adhere to international law results in either moral condemnation from other nations, sanctions, or other means of soft diplomatic enforcement. In this case, the legal experts give opinions which are seen as binding by the European Court of Human Rights, which might see this body becoming the next tribunal Julian Assange approaches to beg for his human rights to be enforced.
The negligence of media in this matter is astonishing, given that the press release announcing the decision gave the following guidance to media:
'NOTE TO EDITORS:
'The Opinions of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention are legally-binding to the extent that they are based on binding international human rights law, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The WGAD has a mandate to investigate allegations of individuals being deprived of their liberty in an arbitrary way or inconsistently with international human rights standards, and to recommend remedies such as release from detention and compensation, when appropriate.
'The binding nature of its opinions derives from the collaboration by States in the procedure, the adversarial nature of is findings and also by the authority given to the WGAD by the UN Human Rights Council. The Opinions of the WGAD are also considered as authoritative by prominent international and regional judicial institutions, including the European Court of Human Rights. '
Here is the full press release from the United Nations' Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, which affirms what I have stated, that the Julian Assange decision is legally binding on Great Britain and Sweden in International Law: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=17013&LangID=E
Media, furthermore, stated that the decision was only by three of five panel members, because the Australian member was recused and the Ukrainian member ruled in a minority decision that there was no arbitrary detention.
The rules of the Working Group clearly state that a member deciding a matter involving a citizen of their own nation, must recuse themselves from that matter. In such a matter, the Working Group decides based on the opinions of the four remaining judges. This is the reason for the recusal, a reason which many in media neglected to mention.
It is also standard practice for minority decisions (which are common), to be published alongside the decision of the majority.
There was no malice on the part of the Ukrainian member, in his choice to disagree with the majority decision, and his dissent does not make the decision of the majority any less binding. Minority decisions are common in most jurisdictions, including amongst international law panels.
Finally, it needs to be noted that Sweden issued their arrest warrant purely in order to question Julian Assange, and the arrest warrant was not a judicially issued warrant for arrest of a person charged with a crime. Julian Assange has stated that he is prepared to be interviewed by the prosecutor from the Ecuadorian Embassy, whether via means such as skype, or in person, by the assistance of embassy officials.
This is standard practice in Swedish cases, and has oddly been rejected by Sweden in this specific case. British law currently, according to Assange's legal team, demands that European Warrants not issued by judicial officers not be enforced in Britain. They assert that the Assange warrant is in fact not a judicial warrant, and have questioned why Britain continues to pursue Assange, despite the change of law which was effected to not allow non-judicial warrants to be executed for means of extradition.
Many media articles also entirely avoid the argument that Assange will be extradited to America to face possible torture and indefinite detention if not death, for his publishing of the Bradley Manning documents. They portray it as a matter of a rapist avoiding justice. Perhaps Julian Assange is in fact a rapist, but he has yet to be charged and has been refused the right in natural justice to offer his version of events to Swedish police. Without the larger background to the story, and the important factor of Assange not having been charged, their portrayal cannot be seen as anything but bizarre, given that the American desire to extradite Assange from Sweden is central to the ruling of the UN body in question.
This article does not constitute legal advice, and is provided for informative and journalistic purposes. For legal advice, please contact a lawyer with specific details of your personal legal issue.
She petrified me, I was fascinated, like snake prey, staring at one, upon the hypnotic eyes, Or a cat in headlights. Screech, splat, there it was, that lifeless deflation, it had once been me. She undulated and swayed, like an old pine tree, My blood solidi...
- SACNSEditor, 2007 - present
- ~Sacns (current)
- Media Notes (current)
- The Truth About Everyday Music (current)
- Tempest and the Hurricane (current)
- Tempest Without The Hurricane (current)
- Aupiais Notes (current)
- Catholic watchdog (current)
- Scripturelink Catholic Voters' Guide (current)
- Afrique du Sud catholique (current)
- Under the Lime Sun (current)
- Tridentine and Faith (current)
- Suid-Afrikaanse Katolieke (current)
- Sudáfricano Católica (current)
- Scripturelink Days and Dates (current)
- Scripturelink Ecyclopedia (current)
- ~SACNS (current)
- God Blessed me with a Saint (current)
- Insider Confessions Analysis (current)
- a legal listening post (current)
- Going White Saint (current)
- World Tainted Green (current)
A Lesser Instinct | My first foray into the world of long form fiction.
Read it without payment - on Scribd:
I have always been fascinated with the law. By chance, it happens to be my field. I am an admitted attorney of the High Court of South Africa, as of 28 January 2016.
It was my fellow students' suggestions, in the final years of school, that I might be suited to a career in law, along with long discussions with a connection of mine - who caused me to gain a keen interest in the history of the Roman Empire, its language, and its laws - that made me realise that law was a choice of career that well suited my life path. I enrolled in a 4-year LLB degree at Wits University and subsequently graduated Legum Baccalaureus (Bachelor of Laws) a few years later.
I completed, with distinction, the Law Society's Legal Education and Development (L.E.A.D.) School for Legal Practice program, in lieu of a second year of articles. I've passed all four attorney's admission examinations, and finished my required period for articles.
I believe success requires not just hard work, but intelligence, perseverance, humility, integrity, ingenuity, diligence, a strong work ethic, and the courage to request the assistance of those better-versed in a matter, or field.
I am passionate about the place of my birth, South Africa and am proud to be a patriot and citizen of this diverse and beautiful nation. I consider myself a global citizen and keep connections in a number of different nations across the world. Communicating with people from other cultures, I believe, has aided me to have a more open-minded approach in so far as how I see and interact with the world.
The cultures and legal systems, morals, and courtesy systems, languages, intricacies and religions of South Africa and of the world, are subjects I love to research. I extensively enjoy reading and writing, and in keeping abreast with important events occurring in other countries, I find my knowledge of other languages, especially French, to be quite useful.
- Witswatersrand University Oliver Schreiner Law SchoolLLB Legum Baccalaureus Bachelor of Laws, 2009 - 2013Graduated LLB. My subjects were: Delict (Laws2003) Insurance (Laws3002) Negotiable Instruments & Banking Law (Laws3005) Business Entities (Laws3010) Constitutional Law (Laws3011) Introduction to Law (Laws1006) English Global Literature and Film (Eng1003) Introduction to Constitutional Law (Laws1002) Foundations of South African Law (Laws1004) Persons & Family Law (Laws1005) Customary Law (Laws1003) English Literature in Context (Eng1001) Criminal Law (Laws2001) Contract (Laws2002) Succession (Laws 2004) Legal Information Literacy (Laws2005) Criminal Procedure (Laws3031) Jurisprudence (LAWS2017) Property (LAWS3029) Public International Law (LAWS3030) Evidence (LAWS3032) Civil Procedure (LAWS3033) Forensic Medicine (FORM 4005/1) Administrative Law (LAWS 4060) Special Contracts (LAWS 4056) Appropriate Dispute Resolution (LAWS 4043) Practical Legal Studies (LAWS4003) Competition Law (LAWS4045) Environmental Law (LAWS4047) Insolvency Laws (LAWS4050)
- Trinityhouse High SchoolGeneral, 2004 - 2008
- Trinity House SchoolGeneral, 2001 - 2003
- De La Salle Holy Cross CollegeGeneral, 1996 - 2000