Thursday, 27 October 2011
And to think it is these corrupt creatures that our politicians see fit to set above our own judges. B&A
Here is an interesting side-light on this particular Romanian judge at the ECHR, which reflects unfavourably on that court as a whole:
_____
Of course a defendant or a suspect must be held to be innocent until proven guilty by due process in a court of law. However a person in high office cannot operate under a cloud of suspicion. It would therefore be normal to expect such a person to want to clear their name, or the names of their family members, as soon as possible, and thus to waive any privileges they might enjoy which would constitute an impediment to the continuance of the due process, and to stand aside if need be until their name is so cleared. It therefore may constitute further grounds for suspicion when such personages instead make full use of these privileges to barricade themselves against the investigations by their (former) colleagues.
Well, it so happens that this very judge, Corneliu Birsan, was also on the panel that buried my mother's case. What a coincidence!!
This Romanian judge at the ECHR, Corneliu Birsan, is under fire at present in some of the other media too (The Economist,http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2011/10/corruption-romania?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/endlessgraft , and the Mail,http://synonblog.dailymail.co.uk/ ) for using/abusing his position to cover his wife, an allegedly corrupt judge in the Romanian Appeals Court, from criminal investigation in Romania.
Well, I went and looked up his name, and Lo and Behold, he is one of the panel of seven judges at the ECHR who buried my mother's case in 1999! See the court's decision on that case here:http://www.rettsveven.info/Content/Menneskerett/CaseLaw/Judgments/97_037900.html . In this case my mother was the victim of fatal, couldn't-give-a-toss, medical malpractice in Florence. In the ensuing criminal investigation the doctors involved told untruths, documented as such, which could only have been deliberate lies. The judicial authorities wilfully ignored these lies, and shelved the case. My only recourse then was to bring a case before the ECHR against the Republic of Italy, under article 2, for failure to protect the right to life. The court's judgement (linked above), rather then refuting the facts and arguments I had submitted, simply ignored them and dismissed my application.
(In addition, C. Birsan may also be one of the panel that condemned the UK over the treatment given to the murderers of poor little James Bulger, I do remember that I "shared" a couple of judges from that panel too).
These recent revelations on the character of this judge make the treatment my mother received at the hands of the ECHR even more "shoddy", as H. Malins MP QC and a member of the Council of Europe said, and "shocking" as it was described by Leolin Price QC CBE. It vindicates Lord Hoffman's opinion on the ECHR that it is absurd that our human rights should lie in the lap of judges from places with traditions like those of Romania, Turkey, etc.
It all goes to show that not only does the ECHR stop us from dealing with criminals as we see fit, but it doesn't even do what it says on the tin - ie protect basic human rights (the right to life, for gawdssakes!!) of people like my mother. There is a case to argue that the court was corrupted. By allowing there to be two Italian judges (and the ostensibly San Marino judge had worked for the Italian State Advocate's office, so was a colleague of the applicant's adversary) in a case of a British citizen vs the Republic of Italy, the court certainly can be said not to have had the "appearance of impartiality". Its lack of impartiality in fact can be seen by its wilful refusal to even consider the evidence and arguments presented to it.
Clearly the Italians (with two judges on the panel, one of them masquerading as San Marino!) "cooked" my mother's case, and it wouldn't be outlandish to suppose they had little trouble with cooking Mr Birsan.
Why do we in Britain continue to prostrate ourselves before a court, the ECHR, which is populated by personages such as these? And prostrate ourselves we do, we allow them to decide for us what our human rights should or should not be and how they may or may not be best protected. When I asked the Foreign Office to assist in "affording such protection and assistance as may be necessary", they replied that there was nothing they could do, for there is "no route of appeal against a decision by the ECHR".
It is an abomination, and the sooner we withdraw from the jursidiction of this fake "court of law" as well as from the EU, the better.
Torquil
20.10.11 - Romanian judge claims European immunity in jewels-for-verdicts case - Corruption in Bulgaria and Romania still unpunished, EU says - Romania asks to lift immunity of cash-for-ammendments MEP
By Valentina Pop
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has thrown its weight behind one of its judges who claimed diplomatic immunity for his wife, a Romanian top-judge investigated for corruption. "The Court is concerned that in carrying out a search in the home of the Romanian judge as part of an inquiry concerning allegations about his wife the rules on immunity may not have been respected," the Strasbourg-based court said in a press release on Wednesday (19 October).
Bucharest should have asked the ECHR to lift the immunity of its Romanian member, Corneliu Birsan, before raiding his and his wife's house located in a Romanian mountain resort, it explained. "At the present time no request for a waiver of the immunity has been presented to the Court," the statement added. Romanian prosecutors responded on Thursday by saying that the investigation is not targeting the ECHR judge or his activities - for which he is granted diplomatic immunity - but his wife, Gabriela Birsan, a judge in Romania's highest appeals court suspected of having issued favourable verdicts to a businessman who allegedly offered her jewellery and expensive trips abroad.
The Birsans' claim for immunity was rejected on Tuesday by Romania's top magistrate council, who had also granted prosecutors permission to raid the house. But if the ECHR is proven right, the whole case may be dropped. "What anti-corruption prosecutors want is to continue the investigation, in line with all legal and ECHR rules, especially since these are suspicions of corruption at a highest level - a judge sitting in Romania's highest court," Livia Saplacan, spokeswoman for the anti-corruption prosecutor's office told this website.
The case is just one in a series of high-level corruption files which were opened in Romania in the past five years, few of which have targeted judges so far. Procedural appeals and a reluctance to hand down tough sentences have prevented courts from sending most of these suspects behind bars. This is one of the main issues in the yearly EU commission reports on Romania and Bulgaria's justice reform.
Posts
