Posts by Sacha
-
Hard News: Do you like what we've done…, in reply to Sacha,
though that's as accurate as you could be
Actually I don't think I'm right about that
-
Hard News: Do you like what we've done…, in reply to Steve Parks,
I like the idea of automatically remembering which page was last loaded, though that's as accurate as you could be. I suggested upthread using a Favourite function as a manual way to mark the specific last-read post, but I realise any solution will take some work.
-
Back on topic, Paul Buchanan weighs in.
About the process:On October 15, 2007 a number of individuals were arrested on a variety of charges, including planning terrorist attacks. Others were arrested later, and collectively they have come to be known as the Urewera 18. On May 30, 2011, three and half years after they were arrested, the majority of these defendants will finally go to trial (three defendants will be tried separately). Not only is the delay largely a result of the Police and Crown trying to introduce new charges after the fact and argue for the admissibility of evidence obtained under the Terrorism Suppression Act that was ultimately not invoked against the accused.
Now, in a decision which has had its reasoning suppressed by the court, the Urewera 15 have been ordered to have a trial by judge. You read correctly: not only have they been denied the right to a prompt trial but are now denied a jury of their peers.
To that can be added holding the trial in Auckland when most of the defendants live elsewhere and their purported crimes were committed outside of Auckland.
Between the delays, venue and judge-only trial, the Crown and judiciary is engaging in a blood-letting exercise designed to drain the defendants materially and emotionally long before they enter the courtroom on May 30.
And about the media silence:
Why is this? Is this silence a result of the fact that the accused are an ideological minority that are easy to scapegoat and persecute? If so, that is exactly the reason why the full spectrum of democratic commentators should be protesting the case: in a democracy it is not mainstream, “normal,” “nice guys” who deserve the most legal protection and rights of redress.
It is the ideologically suspect, reprehensible, marginalised, ostracized or otherwise outcast who deserve the full protections of law precisely because they are at the mercy of the majority–a majority that is often ill-informed or manipulated by authorities when it comes to evaluating the merits of any given case against anti-status quo political activists. The majority may rule, but free, fair and impartial trials are the minority’s best bulwark against its tyranny.
-
Unrelated but lovely turn of phrase from Jim Eagles about our teflon PM:
It's not just that if he fell down a sewer he'd emerge with a smoked salmon in his mouth - though he would - but also that he'd exit smiling and waving, announce an inquiry, mumble something about the time he fell into a septic tank as a boy, and win compliments on his deodorant.
-
Hard News: Behaving badly at the bottom…, in reply to Russell Brown,
the judge could have revealed more of his reasoning
her :)
I cannot see the reason for a judge alone trial being anything other than
I haven't read enough background (and it's too late in the year), but isn't there a quite separate set of criteria operating in this case on national security grounds? Though how that fits with what I recall as the failure of the original terrorism-oriented charges seems intriguiing.
-
Hard News: Behaving badly at the bottom…, in reply to giovanni tiso,
I'm pretty sure it will continue not giving a toss about civil rights, as it has thus far
A bigger story, yes
-
Russell, you've proven here (and Idiot/Savant likewise) that it's not impossible to put together a brief story about the suppressed Urewera trial arrangements. Delving into the legislative changes a few years back that made them possible would even lend itself to a longer article.
So (skeletal staff notwithstanding) why no mention at all in any of our media outlets?
-
Speaker: It's called "planning" for a reason, in reply to Kumara Republic,
I've been brainstorming ideas to expose the real costs - and agenda - of the Holiday Highway.
Please do - someone has to, given the feeble opposition on offer. The raw facts and analysis are there from parties like the Campaign for Better Transport and transportblog.co.nz. Some added marketing/political oomph is called for.
Exposing the real subsidies to trucks and cars is crucial. So is publicising the broadest cost-benefit ramifications of investing so heavily in 1950s infrastructure like highways to support old dirty industries like coal mining and corporate dairying at the expense of 2050s infrastructure like affordable broadband, lifelong learning systems and peak-oil-proof public transport networks and urban forms.
The lack of ambition of these smug yesterday's men needs to be shouted from rooftops.
-
Speaker: It's called "planning" for a reason, in reply to Russell Brown,
feeble and petulant as that
reckon
-
In a triumph of illogic, ignorant numpties writing the Herald's editorials join Joyce's anti-rail chorus. Surely, they breathlessly intone, if Auckland's rail network can survive being shut down over its least busy time of year for exceptional major rebuilding work then the whole thing must be simply unnecessary. Trucks and buses uber alles.
Maybe rail commuters are all on holiday at this time of year, or maybe those working are just as happy to take the buses that Auckland Transport has arranged.
In that case, it may be wondered why the city is getting an upgraded rail service to run at untold operating losses, if buses can do the same job.
...
The case for upgrading rail rests on assumptions that it will attract many more people to live near a station or become employers in the CBD. It is a gamble the Auckland Council is willing to take with the Government's money. "Build it", say our civic visionaries, "and commuters will come".
They point to the growth in rail passengers since the Britomart terminal was built. But it was apparent to early assessors of the business plan for rail project that it would probably draw passengers from certain bus routes rather than increase public transport patronage overall. That impression is reinforced by the ease with which buses have been substituted for trains during this rail shutdown.