Public Act and Application - Assignment Example

Public Law 2 Question Several families and single persons have now been refused assistance by "Integration", and "Settled" seek your advice as to whether they can seek judicial review of the policy changes and whether there may be grounds for such a review. Answer to Question 1: The area of law for examination is the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 The British Nationality Act 1981 also needs to be perused to get a better understanding of the laws governing this particular Case. Hamid v. Secretary of State for the Home Department; Gaafar v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Mohammed v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] All ER (D) 285 (Oct); [2005] EWCA Civ 12191 R (on the application of the Refugee Legal Centre) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] EWHC 6842 The grounds to be considered for the judical review would be based on whether they are legal immigrants possessing papers or illegal immigrants who have sneaked across the borders into the country. A detailed study of the relevant laws governing immigration would provide insight to this aspect taken by James for initiating policy changes conforming to the powers vested on him and also the rules of natural justice.3 Question 2:  Advice the Chief Constable as to whether the NUP have a right to conduct the demonstration and March and whether there are any legal means by which the event might be either banned or effectively policed. Answer to Question 2:   The area of law for examination is Section 132 and 133 of Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, which came into force from 1 July 2005. Demonstrations in the vicinity of Parliament (Demonstrating without authorisation in designated area). This restricts the right to carry out demonstration within a jurisdictional area of upto 1 km of Parliament Square. There is a need to give applications with the Commissioner of Metropolitan Police giving 6 days’ clear notice, failing which at least 24 hours notice is required. 4 Director of Prosecution v. Brian Haw5 The legal means by which this could be effectively policed is by application of the above legal measures including its punitive clauses. Question 3: Advise Constable Ullah as to whether he is within his rights to arrest Maria and Arif. Are there grounds to arrest those NUP members who are shouting obscenities at members of the crowd who hold opposite views to theirs? Is Nicholas detention lawful? Answer to Question 3: It is well within the powers of the police constable, Ullah to arrest Maria and Arif under the powers conferred to him under Section 112 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act, 2005, (Part 3 : Police Powers etc, Powers of Arrest).  Yes, there are grounds to arrest those NUP members who are shouting obscenities at members of the crowd who hold views opposite to theirs. This has been provided under the various sub-sections of Section 110 (24: Powers of arrest: arrest without warrant: constable) of Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. Under the powers conferred to him a police constable may make an arrest if he has reasons to believe that such a person could reasonably be believed to be a suspect for indulging in culpable offence. However the following conditions have to be fulfilled in order to validate the arrest. Under the Section 110 : 24A :(a) “the person making the arrest has reasonable grounds for believing that for any of the reasons mentioned in subsection (4) it is necessary to arrest the person in question; and (b) it appears to the person making the arrest that it is not reasonably practicable for a constable to make it instead. (4) The reasons are to prevent the person in question— (a) causing physical injury to himself or any other person; (b) Suffering physical injury; (c) Causing loss of or damage to property; or (d) Making off before a constable can assume responsibility for him.” (Arrest without warrant: other person: Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. In this case we find that, prima facie, there is no evidence against any possible culpable offence committed by Nicola and her detention does not fulfill any of the requirements stated above. Hence it could be stated that her detention is unlawful6. It may also be suitable to consult the Public Order Act 1986 in order to determine whether any provisions of this statute could be applicable in the above situation, and if so, to what extent Hammond v DPP [2004] EWHC 69 (Admin)7 The Serious Crime Act 2007 could also be perused to gain a better understanding on the relevant laws as applicable.8 Advise the government as to whether the measures relating to nationals having to be exclusive members of the state religious to be granted citizenship status, and the right to the law enforcement authorities to arrest and hold foreign nationals upto 3 months, without benefit of a trial might constitute a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Answer to Question 4: According to the Schedule 5 of Section 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, liberty is inherent right of man and nobody shall be deprived of his/her freedom which is in conformity with accepted tenants of law, except in the case of the lawful arrest or detention of a person to prevent his effecting an unauthorized entry into the country, or of a person against whom action is being taken with a view to deportation or extradition. Decided case law Van Mechelen v. Netherlands - 23 April 19979 Everyone who is arrested shall be informed promptly, in a language which he understands, of the reasons for his arrest and the charge against him. Everyone arrested or detained in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1(c) of this article shall be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorized by law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial. Release may be conditioned by guarantees to appear for trial. Everyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings by which the lawfulness of his detention shall be decided speedily by a court and his release ordered if the detention is not lawful. Everyone who has been the victim of arrest or detention in contravention of the provisions of this article shall have an enforceable right to compensation. In this case we find that the powers granted to the police force, is a departure from the provisions enunciated in Schedule 5 of Sections 1. However, Schedule 15 provides that in the interest of national security or to counter emergency situations in the country, it is allowable to seek departures from the application of the provisions of certain Schedules. (Section 1: Article 15).10 5 However, it shall be incumbent on the party of the party availing itself of such temporary releases from the enforcement of the conditions prescribed in the Schedules to keep the Secretary General of the Council of Europe posted of the steps taken and reasons for the measures. It also needs to inform when the measures would cease to be enforced and the provisos of the European Conventions could be implemented once again. Table of Statutes Table of URLs Table of Cases 1.Hamid v. Secretary of State for the Home Department; Gaafar v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Mohammed v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] All ER (D) 285 (Oct); [2005] EWCA Civ 1219 2. R (on the application of the Refugee Legal Centre) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] EWHC 684 3. Director of Prosecution v. Brian Haw [2007] EWHC 1931 (Admin) 4. Hammond v. DPP [2004] EWHC 69 (Admin) 5. Van Mechelen v. Netherlands [1997] ECHR 23 April 1997 NJ 635 Bibliography Bettinson, Vanessa, Web Journal of Current Legal Issues, Section 4 A of Public Order Act 1986 – accommodating freedom of expression, Dehal v. Crown Prosecution Service (2005) EWHC 2154, 2006, retrieved 9 November 2007, Brian Haw, 2007, retrieved 9 November 2007, Cameron, Iain, The European Convention on Human Rights, Due Process and UN Security Council Counter terrorism Sanctions, 2006, p.13, Council of Europe, The European convention of human rights, 2007, retrieved 5 November 2007, Dummett, Ann, Ministerial statement, The immigration exception in the race relations (Amendment) Act 2000, 2001, ILPA, retrieved 5 November 2007, Immigration Law, Lexis Nexis Butterworth, 2007, retrieved 9 November 2007, Part: 4 Public order and conduct in public place etc. office of the public sector information, 2005, pp. 12-34, retrieved 5 November 2007, Part 3 police powers etc, Office of the public sector information, Power of arrest, 2005, pp.10-34, retrieved 5 November 2007, Serious crime Act 2007, Serious crime prevention order, 2007, retrieved 5 November 2007,   Read More