You have entered an incorrect email address! Please enter your email address here LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply Support conservation and fish with NEW Florida specialty license plate TAGSBike to School Day Previous articleWatch Out for Aldi Facebook ScamNext articleWolf Lake Middle School Students Earn National Recognition Denise Connell RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Please enter your comment! The Anatomy of Fear Share on Facebook Tweet on Twitter Please enter your name here Free webinar for job seekers on best interview answers, hosted by Goodwill June 11 The City of Apopka and Dream Lake Elementary School are teaming up to celebrate national Bike to School Day on May 4th.Students are encouraged to ride their bikes to school that day. The idea is to promote exercise, bike safety and an environmentally friendly alternative to taking a vehicle to school each day.Student riders will meet up with representatives from the city, school and the Apopka Police Department at 7:15 a.m. at the recreational property next to Apopka’s Grossenbacher Water Treatment Facility at East Martin Street and North Park Avenue.Cyclists will take a police-escorted ride along Grossenbacher Drive, up Wells Street and to the school’s basketball courts.Free bike helmets with fittings will be provided while supplies last, courtesy of Amscot Financial. Snacks and refreshments will be served. Gift bags also will be available.Special thanks to event support from Amscot Financial, BAM-B Enterprises, which operates McDonald’s restaurants on Main Street and Rock Springs Road in Apopka, Fast Signs of Apopka-Altamonte Springs and the Dream Lake Elementary PTA.The first-ever National Bike to School Day took place on May 9, 2012, in coordination with the League of American Bicyclists’ National Bike Month. Almost 1,000 local events in 49 states and the District of Columbia joined together to encourage children to safely bicycle or walk to school.The event builds on the popularity of Walk to School Day, which is celebrated across the country – and the world – each October. Many communities and schools have been holding spring walk and bicycle to school events for years. National Bike to School Day provides an opportunity for schools across the country to join together to celebrate and to build off of the energy of National Bike Month. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
CopyHouses•Castro, Chile Architects: Francis Pfenniger Year Completion year of this architecture project ArchDaily “COPY” Holmes – Fuentealba House / Francis Pfenniger “COPY” CopyAbout this officeFrancis PfennigerOfficeFollowProductsWoodSteel#TagsProjectsBuilt ProjectsSelected ProjectsResidential ArchitectureHousesWoodCastroChilePublished on January 09, 2015Cite: “Holmes – Fuentealba House / Francis Pfenniger” [Casa Holmes – Fuentealba / Francis Pfenniger] 09 Jan 2015. ArchDaily. Accessed 11 Jun 2021.
2015 CopyAbout this officeLuciano KrukOfficeFollowProductConcrete#TagsProjectsBuilt ProjectsSelected ProjectsResidential ArchitectureHousesMar AzulArgentinaPublished on August 15, 2016Cite: “H3 House / Luciano Kruk” 15 Aug 2016. ArchDaily. Accessed 11 Jun 2021.
Lee said: “I believe tax-effective giving is the sleeping giant of our sector – many small charities are unable to take advantage of the tax breaks available to them through lack of resource or technical knowledge.“The Institute-led tax-effective giving initiative will provide training and ongoing support to these and other charitable organisations to help maximise their sustainable income.” 29 total views, 1 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving. AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis Howard Lake | 23 February 2006 | News Tax-effective Giving campaign manager announced Tagged with: Recruitment / people Lee Grant is joining the Institute of Fundraising as Tax-Effective Giving Project Manager. He will be responsible for championing the Institute’s tax-effective giving initiative throughout England.Lee will work on developing a series of training workshops, recruitment and training of mentors to work on a 1: 1 basis with smaller charities and implementing a tax effective guide, telephone helpline and website. Lee was previously Fundraising Manager at PDSA and has five years’ experience of fundraising, project management, volunteer recruitment and management and marketing. Advertisement
About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving. AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis 13 total views, 1 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis Hispanic Philanthropy: Exploring the Factors That Influence Giving and Asking (J-B Pf Single Issue Philanthropic Fundraising) Howard Lake | 26 October 2007 | News
A long-delayed investigation into the assassination of African-Caribbean historian Walter Rodney (1942-1980) has concluded that former President Forbes Burnham of Guyana was behind his murder.Although that was the assumption after Rodney was killed by an explosive communication device in his brother’s car on June 13, 1980, the Burnham government claimed that the historian, who led the opposition Working People’s Alliance, died during an attempt to bomb a prison near where the incident took place.The Commission of Inquiry was convened in 2014, some 34 years after the assassination of Dr. Rodney, a leading figure in the intellectual and political affairs of both Guyana, a small South American country east of Venezuela, and the African world as a whole. His comrades in the Working People’s Alliance, along with the Rodney family and colleagues throughout the international community, have long demanded a thorough investigation into the circumstances surrounding his death.It took the commission two years to complete a 155-page report outlining its findings. However, the struggle for full disclosure is ongoing in Guyana, where tremendous opposition has for decades demanded a probe into the assassination.The controversial inquiry began under the previous administration of President Donald Ramotar of the Progressive People’s Party. The People’s National Congress, the ruling party at the time of Rodney’s assassination, has been resistant to cooperating fully with the investigation. Forbes Burnham, who held power in Guyana from 1964 until his death in 1985, was said to have felt threatened by Rodney and the WPA, which sought to bridge the political gap between the majority East Indian and African populations.All three major political parties in Guyana during the late 1970s and early 1980s — the ruling PNC, the opposition PPP led by Cheddi Jagan and the WPA headed by Rodney — claimed to be socialist, but efforts by the WPA were clearly aimed at the removal of the Burnham government. Prior to Rodney’s assassination in 1980, the historian and politician was charged, along with other WPA members, with an arson attack on a government facility.Rodney was facing prosecution on these charges even as he continued to organize and speak out against the PNC administration. Those close to Rodney say he believed there was a plot underway to take his life.Obstacles to making report publicThere was a delay in the printing of the commission report, and it has still not been made fully public or presented to Guyana’s legislative body.Current Guyana President David Granger, a former commander of the Guyana Defense Forces, held that position at the time of Rodney’s assassination. Granger has been a leading figure in the PNC for years.The COI report concluded: “Prime Minister Burnham knew of the plan and was part of the conspiracy to assassinate Dr. Walter Rodney. Given all the relevant facts, events and circumstances set out in the report, we unhesitatingly conclude that Gregory Smith was not acting alone but had the active and full support, participation and encouragement of, and/or was aided and abetted by the GPF (Guyana Police Force), the GDF (Guyana Defense Force), agencies of the State and the political directorate in the killing of Dr. Walter Rodney.” (Demerara Waves, Feb. 20)The COI stated that Smith, an operative of the GDF, carried out the assassination of Rodney and was then sent to nearby French Guiana, a colony of France. Smith is said to have died in 2002.According to the same article, the released COI report concluded: “We accept that Gregory Smith, renamed Cyril Milton Johnson, received State assistance in going to French Guiana. The choice of country was deliberate and was no doubt informed by the fact that (the) French government, of which French Guiana was a Department, had a policy opposed to the death penalty. In short, it would have been difficult, virtually impossible, to secure the extradition of Smith/Johnson from French Guiana.”The independent Justice for Walter Rodney Committee is calling for the full report to be submitted to the Guyana National Assembly as well as the family and supporters of the martyred historian.The Justice for Walter Rodney Committee is demanding, according to the article, that President Granger “must recognize the historical significance of this inquiry, not only as a means of bringing closure to an aspect of Guyana’s sad history over the last 50 years, but as a measure that, if dealt with properly, can aid the beginnings of the long awaited and lofty ideal of reconciliation, and the expectations of Guyanese at home and abroad for a new beginning.”Rodney’s contributions to socialist thoughtRodney was a well-known and influential Pan-Africanist and Marxist historian as well as a political activist, who studied at the University of the West Indies and the University of London and held a faculty position for years at the University of Dar es Salaam in Tanzania.After working in Tanzania and as a visiting scholar in several higher educational institutions, including the University of Michigan in 1972, Rodney was invited by the University of Guyana to take a faculty position. However, the government of Burnham blocked the appointment in an effort to prevent Rodney from teaching in the country of his birth.Rodney remained and later organized the WPA, bringing together several left and Pan-African organizations. His presence in Guyana politically challenged the image of the Burnham government, which sought to portray itself as a supporter of African liberation movements and socialism.At the time of his assassination, Rodney was writing a seminal “History of the Guyanese Working People,” published in incomplete form after his death. His book entitled “How Europe Underdeveloped Africa,” initially published by the government of Tanzania in 1972, remains a signature text on the role of imperialism in the continuing struggle for genuine liberation and socialism in Africa and internationally.FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thisFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare this
BrazilAmericas Condemning abuses Judicial harassmentFreedom of expression Screen-shot (Gazeta do Povo website) Reporters Without Borders (RSF) condemns concerted attempts by judges in the southern state of Paraná to intimidate journalists with the Gazeta do Povo newspaper over a series of reports in February claiming that the state’s judges were receiving excessively large incomes. June 14, 2016 RSF decries judicial harassment of Gazeta do Povo journalists Organisation News Receive email alerts Related documents (Versão em português) Brasil: RSF repudia assédio judicial contra jornalistas da Gazeta do Povo PDF – 141.38 KB May 13, 2021 Find out more One of the reports, which have revived a debate about the ceilings on the salaries of state employees in Brazil, said that the average pay of Paraná’s judges and prosecutors was more than 20% over the legally stipulated ceiling in 2015.Clearly irritated by the reports, 35 Paraná judges and two Paraná prosecutors filed a total of 37 separate libel suits against five of the newspaper’s employees – reporters Chico Marés, Euclides Lucas Garcia and Rogério Galindo, the website technician Evandro Balmant, and computer graphics designer Guilherme Storck.The five journalists have so far had to travel a total of 6,000 km to attend hearings in 15 different municipalities in Paraná. The damages sought by all the plaintiffs total 1.4 million reais (more than 350,000 euros).Everything indicates that the judges are coordinating their lawsuits. Gazeta do Povo editor Leonardo Mendes says the suits are all virtually identical. In an audio-file leaked shortly after the reports were published, the head of the Paraná Judges’ Association, Frederico Mendes, can be heard confirming that the association will provide the judges with a model for their complaints.“We condemn this manoeuvre and these concerted reprisals by Paraná’s judges with the aim of intimidating the media,” said Emmanuel Colombié, the head of RSF’s Latin America desk. “The judicial procedure used by the judges who claim to have been libelled is tantamount to an instrument of persecution and censorship and constitutes a clear violation of freedom of information.”The Gazeta do Povo insists on the accuracy of its reporting and says all of its information came from the websites of the courts of law and the department of prosecutions. In an editorial, the newspaper said it regretted the fact that “the data in question caused so much embarrassment” and offered the judges space in the newspaper to respond to the allegations.The libel suits have nonetheless not been withdrawn. The newspaper has filed an appeal against the lawsuits with the Supreme Court, requesting that the libel suits should be heard outside Paraná. The request was denied.Brazil is ranked 104th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2016 World Press Freedom Index. RSF_en Follow the news on Brazil April 27, 2021 Find out more News Help by sharing this information 2011-2020: A study of journalist murders in Latin America confirms the importance of strengthening protection policies Alarm after two journalists murdered in Brazil RSF begins research into mechanisms for protecting journalists in Latin America to go further Reports News BrazilAmericas Condemning abuses Judicial harassmentFreedom of expression April 15, 2021 Find out more
ColumnsContempt- Anachronistic? V.Sudhish Pai28 July 2020 9:55 PMShare This – xThomas Paine said that in absolute states the king was the law; in free states the law must be, and is, the king. That is the desideratum of the rule of law which is the tribute paid by power to reason. Freedom of thought and expression including dissent is an important constitutional value which underpins a free and harmonious society. Justice Cardozo observed that freedom of speech…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThomas Paine said that in absolute states the king was the law; in free states the law must be, and is, the king. That is the desideratum of the rule of law which is the tribute paid by power to reason. Freedom of thought and expression including dissent is an important constitutional value which underpins a free and harmonious society. Justice Cardozo observed that freedom of speech is the matrix, the indispensible condition of nearly every other form of freedom. It is the wellspring of civilization. Without it liberty of thought would shrivel. The end result would be that the spirit of man would be mutilated and become enslaved. Discussion, debate and dissent are the very lifeblood of a democracy. Public criticism is essential to the working of democracy and this includes criticism of every institution and organ of the State. This freedom certainly takes within it the right to comment upon and criticise judgments as also the conduct and behaviour of judges. This is an indispensible part of the accountability process and is basic to our system. It is too sacrosanct to be stifled or interfered with. It is neither dangerous nor undesirable. The benefits of freedom of expression are strong in this context also, as David Pannick opines. Fair and robust criticism should not only be not unwelcome, but should be considered necessary, healthy and welcome. In his Lincoln Day Address in 1898, Justice Brewer perceptively said, “It is a mistake to suppose that the Supreme Court is either honoured or helped by being spoken of as beyond criticism. On the contrary, the life and character of the justices should be the object of constant watchfulness by all and its judgments subject to the freest criticism. The time is past in the history of the world when any living man or body of men can be set on a pedestal and decorated with a halo. True, many criticisms maybe, like their authors devoid of good taste; but better all sorts of criticism than no criticism at all. The moving waters are full of life and health, only in the still waters is stagnation and death.” [Government by Injunction, 15, Nat. Corp. Rep. 848, 849] The concept of independence of the judiciary takes queer forms. Judicial independence cannot be an alibi for stifling any talk or effort for setting the judicial house in order or to require people not to speak out against flagrant violation of judicial norms and behaviour. Much worse and more dangerous than any other form of arbitrariness is judicial arbitrariness. Justice Holmes refused to look upon any institution, including the Supreme Court as a Grand Lama and believed that every institution should earn respect through the test of truth. Justice Khanna observed with insight, “The strongest weapon in the armoury of the judiciary is its unsullied image, the esteem it evokes and the confidence it enjoys. Reference is sometimes made to the contempt of court power of the judges to command respect. This, perhaps, is not correct and is apt to mislead. Contempt of court, as observed by a great jurist (Lord Denning), ‘should not be used as a means to uphold our own dignity. This must rest on surer foundations. ……We must rely on our conduct itself to be its own vindication.” The power to punish for contempt is a safeguard not for judges as persons but for the functions they exercise. How relevant is the contempt law today in a free country where criticism of the judiciary is inevitable! Judges have vast powers. People cannot and will not remain silent or mute spectators about the exercise of such powers. Just as decisions of other branches incur criticism, judicial decisions and behaviour would also be amenable to the same.Contempt By ‘Scandalizing The Court’ : A Battle Of Perceptions On An Uneven Field One fails to understand as to what can be wrong or objectionable in discussing, commenting on and assessing a judge’s ability, performance and reputation. Unless and until this is done all talk about a great and independent judiciary is meaningless. If the conduct, behaviour and performance of Presidents and Prime Ministers and a whole host of persons at different levels in various fields can be commented on and criticized there is no reason whatsoever why the performance of judges and their conduct on and off the Bench cannot be. It ill befits anyone functioning under the Constitution and the law to claim any such immunity. Such claim is totally untenable. The judges are as human as anyone else under the sun. Indeed at the very beginning, in 1952, the Supreme Court had rightly and wisely cautioned judges never to be over sensitive to public criticism. We recall Seervai’s biting criticism of the majority opinion in the UP Assembly case (AIR 1965 SC 745) concluding that his discussion of the case showed it as “the most one-sided opinion and for the 6 judges to say that they would decide the matter ‘in a spirit of detached objective enquiry’ must appear hypocritical to the reader.” It was not frowned upon. Professor Glanville Williams’ criticism of a House of Lords judgment in language which was far from moderate was not only not penalised but was acknowledged and accepted and the earlier view changed in the later judgment.[see, R v. Shivpuri, 1987 AC 1] One cannot but refer to the Templeman approach. When the three Law Lords who delivered the majority judgment in the Spycatcher case [Att. Gen v. Guardian Newspaper, (1987) 3 All ER 316] were portrayed in a cartoon in a newspaper with the caption ‘Three Old Fools’, the Court took no notice or offence. Lord Templeman one of the majority judges remarked that they were three in the majority which was absolutely correct; they were not young by any standard and whether they were fools or otherwise was a matter of opinion or perception and that there was no contempt. Following the judgment in Bush vs. Gore, [531 US 98 (2000)] the American Supreme Court judges were severely criticised in the strongest and vilest terms by leading academicians in law journals. But no offence was taken or contempt initiated. Very recently, the Daily Mail published the photo of the three judges who issued the Brexit ruling [see, 2018 AC 61] captioned ‘Enemies of the People’. No notice was taken of it. The legendary Lord Denning, when something was thrown at him in court, did not take offence, leave alone action for contempt. Nearer home in the 1950s it would appear a shoe was flung at the dais in Justice Mahajan’s court in the Supreme Court. Justice Mahajan graciously said that he could understand the plight and agony of a losing litigant in the last court, but judges decide according to their light and one party has to win and the other lose. The judge asked the court master to ensure that no one left the court room bare footed. What grace and wisdom! Contempt of Court has been described as ‘The Proteus of the Legal World assuming an almost infinite diversity of forms.'[Joseph Moskovitz, Contempt of Injunctions Civil and Criminal, 43 Columbia Law Review 780 (1943)].The dilemma of the law of contempt arises because of the constitutional need to balance two great but occasionally conflicting principles-freedom of expression and fair and fearless justice. The key word is ‘justice’, not ‘judge’; the keynote thought is unobstructed public justice. Criticism, far from undermining public confidence in courts, would really enhance it. [see, Baradakanta Mishra v. Registrar AIR 1974 SC 710] The insightful observations of Justice Frankfurter in Bridges v. California 314 US 252 (1941) require to be always remembered: “Judges as persons, or courts as institutions, are entitled to no greater immunity from criticism than other persons or institutions. Just because the holders of judicial office are identified with the interests of justice they may forget their common human frailties and fallibilities. … Therefore judges must be kept mindful of their limitations and their ultimate responsibility by a vigorous stream of criticism expressed with candour however blunt. … Courts and judges must take their share of the gains and pains of discussion which is unfettered except by laws of libel, by self restraint and by good taste. … Nor should restrictions be permitted that cramp the feeling of freedom in the use of tongue or pen regardless of the temper or the truth of what may be uttered. … Since courts, although representing the law, are also sitting in judgment, as it were, on their own function in exercising their power to punish for contempt….it is always better to err on the side of tolerance and even disdainful indifference.” “Even if criticism of the court would have an effect on a judge’s action, the offence of scandalizing the judiciary must be abolished. …. Like other public servants judges should accept criticism as an occupational hazard. …. Because the judiciary enjoys a security of tenure rightly denied to politicians and unique to public servants, it is especially important that the judges should be subject to free and open criticism of the performance of their duties.”(David Pannick, Judges). “In theoretical terms criticism of the judiciary should almost certainly be treated as a form of political speech, and therefore enjoy the highest degree of legal protection.”(Eric Barendt, Freedom of Speech) One can do no better than refer to David Pannick and Judge Jerome Frank. “The judiciary is not the ‘least dangerous branch’ of government. Judges are not mere ‘lions under the throne.’ They send people to the prison and decide the scope and application of all manner of rights and duties with important consequences for individuals and for society. Because the judiciary has such a central role in the government of society, we should (in the words of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes) ‘wash …. with cynical acid’ this aspect of public life. Unless and until we treat judges as fallible human beings whose official conduct is subject to the same critical analysis as that of other organs of government, judges will remain members of a priesthood who have great powers over the rest of the community, but who are otherwise isolated from them and misunderstood by them, to their mutual disadvantage. Some politicians, and a few jurists, urge that it is unwise or even dangerous to tell the truth about the judiciary. Judge Jerome Frank of the US Court of Appeals sensibly explained that he had “little patience with, or respect for, that suggestion. I am unable to conceive… that, in a democracy, it can ever be unwise to acquaint the public with the truth about the workings of any branch of government. It is wholly undemocratic to treat the public as children who are unable to accept the inescapable shortcomings of man-made institutions. … The best way to bring about the elimination of those shortcomings of our judicial system which are capable of being eliminated is to have all our citizens informed as to how that system now functions. It is a mistake, therefore, to try to establish and maintain, through ignorance, public esteem for our courts.” This was said over 70 years ago. How much more relevant it is today! The ‘dubious and controversial’ scandalizing the Court of illegitimate ancestry* and the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985 should be done away with. The entire law of criminal contempt is shrouded in uncertainty, its definition itself being vague. While one can accept the constraints imposed by the rule of law it is difficult to appreciate and accept ad hoc rules imposed as per the idiosyncrasies of individual judges. That is the very antithesis of the rule of law. All this is anachronistic and out of tune with the constitutional democratic ethos. The law regarding the scandalising the Court was got from England. In 2012 the Law Commission in UK found that there was a lot of abusive material directed against judges particularly online, much of it being too silly to be taken seriously. It was noted that the judges successfully used civil defamation law to penalise wrong doers. The contempt jurisdiction was not invoked. And it is significant that in 2013 England abolished the offence of scandalising the Court altogether. In many countries contempt jurisdiction is regarded as antiquated and is sparingly exercised. It is not used to silence comments on judges or legal matters. To speak of the judges’ ignorance of the law or of any improper conduct may be intemperate criticism, it cannot be contempt. That respect for the judiciary can be won by shielding judges from criticism is a misconception. Muzzling criticism against judges and judgments will not preserve public confidence in Courts. That is preserved and enhanced by the work the Court does- by its professional competence and moral integrity- and does not depend on what people are publicly allowed to say about it. It has been well said that when the Constitution gives the judiciary enormous power and responsibility to ensure that every institution and every citizen must strictly conform to law and to the standards of propriety, it is logical then to expect that the institution of the judiciary itself must be worthy of the full confidence of the people. [cf: Dr.P.C.Alexander: India in the New Millenium]. As Chief Justice Warren Burger warned, “A Court which is final and unreviewable needs more careful scrutiny than any other. Unreviewable power is the most likely to self indulge itself and the least likely to engage in dispassionate self analysis…. In a country like ours, no public institution, or the people who operate it, can be above public debate.” Justice Douglas remarked that judges are supposed to be “men of fortitude, able to thrive in a hardy climate, who should be able to shrug off contemptuous statements.”[Craig v. Harney, 331 US 367, 376 (1947)] Our courts have done so on many occasions. But there have also been instances of courts being over sensitive which is neither necessary nor desirable. That is nothing but contempt powers being designed to try to maintain a good public image for the judiciary. The attitude and ability to shrug off is what is required and commendable. In saying all this, the idea is only to endeavour to seek improvement. One is fortified by what Justice Holmes said: “I take it for granted that no hearer of mine will misinterpret what I have to say as the language of cynicism…I trust that no one will understand me to be speaking with disrespect of the law, because I criticize it so freely. I venerate the law and especially our system of law, as one of the vastest products of the human mind…But one may criticize even what one reveres. Law is the business to which my life is devoted and I should show less than devotion if I did not do what in me lies to improve it.”[The Path of the Law, Collected Legal Papers, 167,194 (1920)] *It has been described as dubious and controversial in Law of Contempt by Gordon Borie and Nigel Lowe, 3rd edition, Butterworths, Oxford (UK), 1996 p 331. It is dubious because it originates from a dictum of one judge, Justice J .E. Wilmot in John Wilkes case, ie, R vs Almon long ago in 1765 and controversial as the dictum was recorded in a judgment that was never delivered, but was published by the judge’s son after his father died. The judgment had been reserved after argument and when it was ready to be delivered it was found that the case against Wilkes was incorrectly titled and since the then procedural law did not permit an amendment unless agreed to by both parties, the entire case had to be abandoned. Thus it is based on a judgment never delivered in court in a case that had already abated!Views are personal only. Next Story
jarun011/iStock(NEW YORK) — A global pandemic of the novel coronavirus has infected close to two million people worldwide. More than 128,000 people across the globe have died from COVID-19, the disease caused by the new respiratory virus, according to data compiled by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University. The actual numbers are believed to be much higher due to testing shortages, many unreported cases and suspicions that some governments are hiding the scope of their nations’ outbreaks. Since the first cases were detected in China in December, the United States has become the worst-affected nation, with more than 609,000 diagnosed cases and at least 26,057 deaths. The number of cases in New York state alone is higher than in any single country outside the U.S. Here’s how the news is developing Wednesday. All times Eastern:11:35 a.m.: NYC grocery stores should require patrons wear masks: MayorIn hard-hit New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio says grocery stores should require customers to wear face coverings while shopping.“Every store has the right to put up that guidance and make it a requirement for entry into the store,” the mayor said, calling a face-covering requirement in grocery stores no different than “no shirt, no shoes, no service” signs.De Blasio said he would talk about loosening restrictions in New York City when there’s a steady drop in three key COVID-19 indicators for 10 to 14 days: those admitted to hospitals, those in intensive care units, and the percentage of people tested who are positive.The mayor said the number of patients admitted to hospitals and the number of people in ICUs have both slightly increased, while the percentage of people tested who are positive has made a small improvement.De Blasio on Wednesday also announced a $170 million investment to make sure no New Yorker goes hungry.Before the pandemic, 1.2 million New Yorkers were food insecure, including 1 in 5 children, the mayor said. Now, an estimated half-million New Yorkers have lost or will lose their jobs in the immediate future, he said.Since March 16, 4.5 million meals have been served to people in New York City, de Blasio said.Ten million meals will be served in April alone, with the ability to grow, he said.11 a.m.: DC suburb emerges as possible new epicenterAs Maryland’s death toll passes 400, with new “probable” deaths included in the tally, Prince George’s County, Maryland — a D.C. suburb — may be emerging as a new epicenter.Prince George’s County is home to 900,000 residents, the majority of whom are African American, The Washington Post reported.The county has reported 2,516 cases, 65 deaths and 11 “probable” deaths.Hospitals are overwhelmed and sending some of the sick to facilities outside of the county, the Post said.Prince George’s County is nearing the death toll in the nation’s capital. D.C. has reported 72 fatalities and 5 probable fatalities.10:20 a.m.: TSA screens less than 90,000 passengers for 1st time during outbreakDomestic airline travel reached a new low Tuesday when the TSA screened less than 90,000 passengers for the first time during the COVID-19 outbreak.The TSA screened 87,534 travelers at checkpoints nationwide on Tuesday compared to 2,208,688 on the same weekday last year — around a 96% decrease.The TSA says 403 of its employees have tested positive for COVID-19. Out of those, three have died and 45 employees have recovered.9:37 a.m.: China says Trump will harm global fight against pandemic by pulling WHO fundsChina urged the U.S. not to halt its funding to the World Health Organization on Wednesday, saying it would undermine the global fight against the coronavirus pandemic.During Wednesday’s press briefing in Beijing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said President Donald Trump’s decision to cut the U.S. contributions to the WHO would impact all countries across the globe, especially the more vulnerable ones.Furthermore, the move “weakens the WHO’s capabilities and harms international cooperation,” he said.“At present, the global pandemic situation is grim and is at a critical moment,” Zhao told reporters. “We urge the U.S. to fulfill its responsibilities and obligations, and support WHO to lead the international combat against the pandemic.”8:58 a.m.: Tour de France delayed till late AugustCycling’s biggest race, the Tour de France, has been postponed until late August due to the coronavirus pandemic. The International Cycling Union announced the decision Wednesday, saying the prestigious race will now run from Aug. 29 to Sept. 20. The Tour de France was originally slated to kick off in Nice on June 27. “Holding this event in the best conditions possible is judged essential given its central place in cycling’s economy and its exposure, in particular for the teams that benefit on this occasion from unparalleled visibility,” the International Cycling Union said in a statement.France is among the worst-affected countries in the pandemic, with more than 131,000 diagnosed cases of COVID-19 and over 15,000 deaths, according to a count kept by Johns Hopkins University. French President Emmanuel Macron has extended a lockdown for the country till May 11. Addressing the nation Monday night, Macron said he sees “hopeful signs” since imposing the nationwide lockdown on March 17 in an effort to stem the spread of the novel coronavirus. He said schools will reopen “progressively,” starting from May 11. However, cafes, restaurants, cinemas, concert halls, museums and hotels will remain closed and large gatherings won’t be allowed until mid-July.8:23 a.m.: US Forces Japan declare public health emergency for all basesThe commander of the United States Forces Japan on Wednesday declared a public health emergency for all bases in Japan as the country sees a surge in novel coronavirus infections. U.S. Forces Japan, a subset of the military’s Indo-Pacific Command, had previously declared an emergency only for the county’s Kanto Plain, which includes Tokyo.The newest declaration, which will remain in effect through May 15, gives commanders the authority to enforce compliance of health protection measures on those who live and work on all U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine installations and facilities located in Japan. The order applies to 50,000 military personnel as well as tens of thousands of their family members and civilian contractors. Last month, an active duty member of the U.S. Forces Japan tested positive for COVID-19.7:15 a.m.: Americans should prepare for ‘another battle’ with virus, CDC director saysDr. Robert Redfield, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, warned Wednesday that Americans should be prepared for a second wave of novel coronavirus infections in the winter, even as the epidemic appears to have hit its peak in parts of the country. “I think we have to assume this is like other respiratory viruses and there will be a seasonality to it,” Redfield told ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos in an interview on Good Morning America.“Until we see it, we don’t know for certain,” he added. “But i think it’s critical that we plan this virus is likely to follow a seasonality pattern similar to flu, and we’re going to have another battle with it upfront and aggressively next winter.” It’s important the country takes the time now to improve its testing capacity and expand public health capacity so that health workers can detect cases early, conduct contact tracing and isolate potentially infected individuals. “I call it block and tackle,” Redfield said. “The outbreak this year got ahead of that, so we went into full mitigation and we lost the ability to use critical public health tools. We are working hard to augment them now so that, as we get into the next season, we’ll be able to stay in high containment mode while we complement that with some continued mitigation strategies.”Redfield praised members of the public for heeding stay-at-home orders and social distancing measures. “When we did our original models looking at this outbreak, we were looking at, you know, up to 2.2 million people that might have died before the fall,” he said. “And when you see, even though 26,000 is still an enormous loss of human life, it really is a tribute to the mitigation that the American public did.” “It’s really a testament to the sacrifice the American public has taken and the leadership that we’ve had in a number of these states to give that example,” he added. Redfield said the CDC and the White House coronavirus task force are “aggressively working through the best options as to help assist the states as they begin to reopen our country one state at a time.” The process is ongoing and it will be a state-by-state decision, according to Redfield. “I think we will see some states that the governors feel that are ready and we’re poised to assist them with that re-opening,” he added. “And I think you’ll see that the plan in terms of how that will happen will be finalized by the White House task force in the days ahead.” When asked about President Donald Trump’s decision to halt U.S. funding to the World Health Organization and whether he thinks the agency failed in its outbreak response, Redfield was reluctant to criticize the WHO and instead said, “I think I’d like to do the postmortem on this outbreak once we get through it together.” “The CDC and WHO has had a long history of working together in multiple outbreaks throughout the world, as we continue to do in this one, and so we’ve had a very productive public health relationship,” he added. “We continue to have that.”6:15 a.m.: Russia reports its largest single-day increase in new casesRussia on Wednesday reported a record number of new cases of the novel coronavirus.The Russian government registered 3,388 new cases in the past 24 hours — the country’s biggest single-day jump yet.There are now 24,490 diagnosed cases of COVID-19 across Russia, and at least 198 people have died from the disease.Moscow, with a population of more than 12 million people, is by far the hardest-hit city in the country.5:42 a.m.: Bill Gates warns freezing funding for WHO ‘is as dangerous as it sounds’Microsoft founder and billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates took to Twitter early Wednesday to denounce U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to freeze American funding to the World Health Organization.The United States is, by far, the single largest financial contributor to the WHO, and Gates said the United Nations’ health agency is needed “now more than ever.”“Halting funding for the World Health Organization during a world health crisis is as dangerous as it sounds,” Gates tweeted. “Their work is slowing the spread of COVID-19 and if that work is stopped no other organization can replace them.”Halting funding for the World Health Organization during a world health crisis is as dangerous as it sounds. Their work is slowing the spread of COVID-19 and if that work is stopped no other organization can replace them. The world needs @WHO now more than ever.— Bill Gates (@BillGates) April 15, 2020Trump announced Tuesday that he would cut U.S. contributions to the WHO, pending a review into its handling of the coronavirus pandemic.The president claimed the WHO mismanaged the outbreak response and specifically laid blame on the organization’s lack of support for his ban on travel from China when the outbreak began.“They were very much opposed to what we did,” Trump said during Tuesday’s daily briefing.The president said he will have conversations with other health officials around the world about where the funds earmarked for the WHO would go. He did not rule out restoring the money to the organization.Trump’s announcement is likely to set up a battle with Congress, which controls funding for the Geneva-based international body.The WHO started sounding the alarm over the novel coronavirus outbreak in China in mid-January and then designated it a global health emergency on Jan. 30. On March 11, the organization declared the outbreak a pandemic after the virus had spread to every continent except Antarctica.3:30 a.m.: Social distancing measures may be necessary into 2022, researchers sayPeople around the world may need to continue practicing some level of social distancing through 2022 to contain the novel coronavirus pandemic in the absence of an effective treatment or vaccine, or unless hospital capacity is increased, according to a new study.In the study published Tuesday in the journal Science, researchers from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health warned that their projections indicate there would be a large resurgence of infection if social distancing measures are lifted all at once, potentially delaying the epidemic’s peak and exacerbating the load on critical care resources.The researchers used data from the United States to model transmission of other coronaviruses in temperate regions and to project possible scenarios of COVID-19 infection through the year 2025.“Less effective one-time distancing efforts may result in a prolonged single-peak epidemic, with the extent of strain on the healthcare system and the required duration of distancing depending on the effectiveness,” the study’s authors wrote. “Intermittent distancing may be required into 2022 unless critical care capacity is increased substantially or a treatment or vaccine becomes available.”Effective treatments and vaccines may take months to years to develop and test, leaving non-pharmaceutical interventions as the only immediate means of curbing the spread of infection. Copyright © 2020, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
Home » News » Housing Market » Agent stock down 6.75% compared to 2015, latest Rightmove index figures reveal previous nextHousing MarketAgent stock down 6.75% compared to 2015, latest Rightmove index figures revealLatest data shows the degree to which economic uncertainty and extra taxation has reduced the amount of stock for sale since 2015.Nigel Lewis11th December 20170903 Views The average level of sales stock per estate agent branch has dropped by 6.75% compared to 2015, the latest Rightmove index reveals.This decrease in the number of homes available for sale is across the board; for every month so far this year the average figure is lower than the same month two years ago.During 2015, historical Rightmove data shows, agents had 61.8 properties on their books on average, which has now dropped by four properties to 57.6 properties.Rightmove says in its report that overall estate agents’ stock of property for sale remains “tight” particularly further north where demand is exceeding supply.Northern price risesThis is also pushing up prices faster in the north than the south – Rightmove says the North East’s housing market is experiencing the fastest asking price growth at the moment, up 1.3% month-on-month and 4.7% year-on-year.Also, it’s the regions above London that are doing the best year-on-year as London, the SE and SW all experiencing weaker price growth than their northern counterparts.Rightmove is also pessimistic about next year, which it says will see asking price growth of 1% overall.“2018 will continue the 2017 trend by being a real mixed bag of different price pressures both up and down, but the net result is that we forecast another year of a slowing in the pace of price rises,” says Rightmove Director Miles Shipside (pictured, left).“The peak in the cycle of rising prices was 2015’s annual jump of 7.4%. The following year saw price growth more than halve to 3.4%, while 2017 is finishing up at 1.2%.”Miles Shipside agent stock asking prices Rightmove house price index rightmove index December 2017 December 11, 2017Nigel LewisWhat’s your opinion? Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.Please note: This is a site for professional discussion. Comments will carry your full name and company.This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.Related articles BREAKING: Evictions paperwork must now include ‘breathing space’ scheme details30th April 2021 City dwellers most satisfied with where they live30th April 2021 Hong Kong remains most expensive city to rent with London in 4th place30th April 2021