COLOMBIAN CRIMINAL IN LINE FOR MASSIVE COMPENSATION DUE TO A PROCEDURAL FLAW – A high court judge has ruled that Isaias Gaviria-Manrique, a Columbian criminal who was finally deported after a string of offenses, is entitled to compensation from the UK Government due to a ‘procedural flaw’ which unlawfully detained him during 2008.
Read full story … Daily Mail
Meebal.com says …
As soon as this news came across our desk we went straight to the readers’ comments and once again the ignorance some people have in terms of understanding the law and judicial procedure is clearly evident.
The first comment; with no less than 1,113 ‘likes’ was from Bart of Leeds in who posted…
“Just one more Judge who is sat in a Ivory Tower paid for out the public purse to make Judgements that have no bearing in reality he just throws public money away as if was confetti.
He should be reprimanded and made to pay the money out of his inflated salary. And no doubt the Lawyers were funded by the Taxpayers. When will the Government rain in these Liberal Judges who are determined to undermine it?”
There can be little doubt that the British public are sick to the back teeth of criminals not only getting away with their crimes but also being compensated on some legal technicality.
It is never more so offensive when such criminals happen to be foreigners and with our continued involvement in the European Convention on Human Rights and our unwillingness to scrap the Human Rights Act 1998 these instances are appearing more frequently and are undoubtedly deemed highly offensive by the British taxpayer.
As you can see by the comment above the public quickly attacked the Judge; he or she is of course responsible for determining what the law states but a judge is NOT responsible for the creation of laws.
The job of a judge is to follow what the legislator has enacted and may NOT at any point freely interpret the meaning of legislation for their own personal ideology or determination of right and wrong.
Yes, there are certain rules that a judge has at hand in order to decipher the meaning of the written word but they may certainly not rewrite it.
In law, the Golden rule, or British rule, is a form of statutory construction traditionally applied by English courts. The other two are the “plain meaning rule” (also known as the “literal rule”) and the “mischief rule.”
The golden rule allows a judge to depart from a word’s normal meaning in order to avoid an absurd result. Wikipedia
Yes, you might be thinking, considering the information above that the ‘mischief rule’ would apply in this particular case and indeed many others like it but the result was not ‘absurd’ in the literal sense; that is the ruling produced exactly what was intended by Parliament when it was constructed and enacted into law.
If the public wants to admonish anyone, then their actions need to be directed at the liberal left-wing progressives for they are the ones that insisted in passing laws in order to make us appear humane, politically correct and above all completely sympathetic to the plight of criminals.
Read through the Daily Mail’s article carefully and you will quickly determine, with a clear mind, that our judges are not to blame; indeed the law changed several times during the periods in which this case went through the courts and it’s amazing how our judges are able to keep up with all the incessant legislation that Parliament continues to produce in order to assist criminals in fleecing the taxpayer.