Sedition Act Prevails: Sat loss: Duke's case dismissed

[sMASH]

rent-al-waris: i make a new law
citizen: how it does work?
rent-al-waris: meem kno, let privy council sort it out for we
citizen: *pikachu face*

[RedVEVO]

^^^

Dictatorship at it's BEST in Trinidad under PNM

[Redman]

The point is that the Law needs changing....there are ways of doing that.
Some legal luminaries say A ...others xyz.

But if the idea is to prevent politicians from abusing the law....what's better than letting the court decide and render judgement?


This way zero politicians are involved.

You should be happy

[De Dragon]

The point is that the Law needs changing....there are ways of doing that.
Some legal luminaries say A ...others xyz.

But if the idea is to prevent politicians from abusing the law....what's better than letting the court decide and render judgement?


This way zero politicians are involved.

You should be happy

EH???
For the hundredth time, the Privy Council cannot change our laws, but merely pronounce on their constitutionality, or whether they were applied fairly. Much as you probably love how the PNM uses their majority to shove unjust laws that violate our rights, Sedition Act will require a special majority, so a heap of politicians on both sides of the aisle will have to be involved.

[Redman]

So if the local Appellate Court affirmed the last Seepersad ruling..what happens?

If the PC says yes or no....we are bound by that decision....

Parliament cannot supersede the courts decision....therefore we back to the courts ultimately steering how the Act is applied....

Which is one of the mechanisms by which the body of law remains relevant as time goes by.

And it is a dated law.
....did you read it?

[Dizzy28]

The point is that the Law needs changing....there are ways of doing that.
Some legal luminaries say A ...others xyz.

But if the idea is to prevent politicians from abusing the law....what's better than letting the court decide and render judgement?


This way zero politicians are involved.

You should be happy

We actually vote for MPs and the subsequent formation of a Government for precisely this reason though.

Based on out Parliament's website they have listed law making first -
"The Parliament of Trinidad and Tobago, also known as the legislature, is the arm of state entrusted with the responsibility of making laws for good governance, and providing oversight of the Government or Executive."
http://www.ttparliament.org/about.php?mid=5

You cant take away a key metric from an employee because you think they will not do good. You need to have the right employee or change them.

[Redman]

Of course finding the right employees in this case seems impossible.

Democracy is the science and art of running the circus from the monkey cage.
H Mencken.

[De Dragon]

So if the local Appellate Court affirmed the last Seepersad ruling..what happens?

If the PC says yes or no....we are bound by that decision....

Parliament cannot supersede the courts decision....therefore we back to the courts ultimately steering how the Act is applied....

Which is one of the mechanisms by which the body of law remains relevant as time goes by.

And it is a dated law.
....did you read it?

Thanks for making my point for me, much as you still don't get it, or are pretending not to.
We don't need the PC to tell us the legislation is flawed
We do not need the PC to tell us the legislation needs amending.
When we conceive laws, do we run them by the PC first?

[Redman]

It eh about the PC.
It’s about whatever is the highest court in the land.

It would be the same thing if it was the CCJ

Would you have an issue if it was the CCJ?

[De Dragon]

It eh about the PC.
It’s about whatever is the highest court in the land.

It would be the same thing if it was the CCJ

Would you have an issue if it was the CCJ?

Where did you get that I had a problem with the PC?
My problem is with 7 year, Tight Shirt Arse-Wari not having the common sense, or decency, to realize when a battle is over, and insists in spending money and time to defend a ridiculously outdated, and vaguely worded law, in the hope of looking good for the PNM sheep.
Whatever the highest court that we recognize, whether it is the PC, or the CCJ, CANNOT change, or recommend changes to our laws! Only our Parliament can do that.

[Redman]

Courts steer how laws are applied.
What happened when Frank Seepersad ruled...and then when his ruling was overturned by the appeal court.?

This is simply the court establishing how the law should be applied.

Whatever the result it would be more relevant than it was before.

[De Dragon]

Courts steer how laws are applied.
What happened when Frank Seepersad ruled...and then when his ruling was overturned by the appeal court.?

This is simply the court establishing how the law should be applied.

Whatever the result it would be more relevant than it was before.

Don't you get tired of being wrong?
The suspension of the order only comes pending the hearing and determination of the substantive appeal. This means the actual findings of Justice Seepersad are yet to be tried and ruled upon.
Stop taking your cues from the PNM FaceBook pages.
Stop trying to look good for your handlers.

[Redman]

Sorry I wasn’t clear.

Seepersad ruled, and improved on the interpretation by his ruling.
Duke case was dismissed.
This appeal..and what ever happens after pushes it further towards being more relevant law today.
They might very well strengthen Seepersads judgment...refining it in whatever technical issues they see fit.

At the end of this process the law will be modified and updated.

These are simple facts.

[De Dragon]

Sorry I wasn’t clear.

Seepersad ruled, and improved on the interpretation by his ruling.
Duke case was dismissed.
This appeal..and what ever happens after pushes it further towards being more relevant law today.
They might very well strengthen Seepersads judgment...refining it in whatever technical issues they see fit.

At the end of this process the law will be modified and updated.

These are simple facts.

Simple to a brain like yours unconcerned with actual facts. The Appeal court also CANNOT change the law, or recommend amendments. There is no need to go to the PC with this matter, or any other where the law is recognized as deficient or outdated. The law doesn't need to cost us millions of dollars to be "modified and updated"
Arse-Wari is playing to the cheap seats, and it seems like you're a VIP member of said seats.

[Redman]

So if frank Seepersads ruling remained un appealed....what would have been the result?

[De Dragon]

So if frank Seepersads ruling remained un appealed....what would have been the result?

Sensible people would table amendments, or a total overhaul of the law, but not our smedium shirted AG, he seems to feel that those extra years in law school makes him brighter than the law fraternity.

[Redman]

Forget the AG for a moment,and his wardrobe.

If frank Seepersads ruling remained un appealed....what would have been the result?

[rspann]

Redman, do you believe in judicial activism?

[De Dragon]

Forget the AG for a moment,and his wardrobe.

If frank Seepersads ruling remained un appealed....what would have been the result?

What happens when you're charged with a partially unconstitutional law? The case is usually withdrawn or thrown out. The reasons were made abundantly clear in Seepersad's ruling, so there is a point to start with in drafting a new or amended version of the law.

[Redman]

Duke case got thrown cuz Seepersad judged it to be unconstitutional.
So ie the law was modified or changed.

It was law before Frank.
Net net it wasn’t after Frank.

If nothing else happened no one can be charged under that act again.
Law is effectively struck down

However it was appealed.
So we go to higher courts..where the decision what ever it is will be binding on lower courts.

The Sedition act covers more than just Sedition as defined today.
You can be charged under the Sedition Act without being Seditious.
So it needs modifying to bring it into relevancy today.

The courts remain imho much better than having the Parliament do it.

[De Dragon]

Duke case got thrown cuz Seepersad judged it to be unconstitutional.
So ie the law was modified or changed.

It was law before Frank.
Net net it wasn’t after Frank.

If nothing else happened no one can be charged under that act again.
Law is effectively struck down

However it was appealed.
So we go to higher courts..where the decision what ever it is will be binding on lower courts.

The Sedition act covers more than just Sedition as defined today.
You can be charged under the Sedition Act without being Seditious.
So it needs modifying to bring it into relevancy today.

The courts remain imho much better than having the Parliament do it.

It's like herding cats
NO COURT CAN CHANGE THE LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Redman]

And yet Dukes Sedition charge was dismissed solely because of Seepersads ruling.

Why is this?

[sMASH]

And yet Dukes Sedition charge was dismissed solely because of Seepersads ruling.

Why is this?

did not change the law, the law still stands. the reasoning is that it violated the constitution. so had to rule against the law. the same bull crap alwaris put in, still there.

[Redman]

Bus­by-Ear­le-Cad­dle re­ject­ed the ap­pli­ca­tion as she ruled that Duke was fac­ing a charge that Bus­by-Ear­le-Cad­dle re­ject­ed the ap­pli­ca­tion as she ruled that Duke was fac­ing a charge that is cur­rent­ly not a law. .

The Chief Magistrate said differently.

The result is that 2 sections of the Act were struck down by Seepersads ruling.
Those 2 sections ceased to exist as law.

If that isn’t a change then nothing is.

Now ...the law is back in play, given the appeal.

Yet another change.





.

[De Dragon]

Bus­by-Ear­le-Cad­dle re­ject­ed the ap­pli­ca­tion as she ruled that Duke was fac­ing a charge that Bus­by-Ear­le-Cad­dle re­ject­ed the ap­pli­ca­tion as she ruled that Duke was fac­ing a charge that is cur­rent­ly not a law. .

The Chief Magistrate said differently.

The result is that 2 sections of the Act were struck down by Seepersads ruling.
Those 2 sections ceased to exist as law.

If that isn’t a change then nothing is.

Now ...the law is back in play, given the appeal.

Yet another change.





.

It seems like common sense will not sway you, at least not once it is one of your PNM fetish men like JUHN Scarfy Goebbels Young or Arse-Wari in particular.
Any court, no matter if it is Magistrates, High, Appeal, or PC CANNOT change a law. They can only interpret, and rule on legality and fairness. This is what Seepersad did, and it is now up to PARLIAMENT, the SOLE law making body of T&T to amend the law to make it constitutionally sound. This is what Arse-Wari should be doing, not gallerying to PNM sheep.

[Redman]

Semantics?

Before the ruling...Duke had a charge.
After the ruling he didn’t.....

You keep saying the courts can’t change law.....yet we are seeing where the judgement and appeals have changed the application of the law, and effectively removed and then replaced parts of the Sedition Act.

In different matter a judge is bound to apply law, sentence and judgment within the precedents set by higher courts.
In this way the law is modified gradually reflecting current ethos etc.
In some cases it moves the Statute law beyond its original scope.
Therefore parliament is not the sole source of law.

The chief magistrate dismissed Dukes case solely as a result of Seepersads decision.
Therefore law was changed.

Statute law is created by parliament.......Statute law evolves through Common or case law.
What we are seeing is the latter.

These are facts

[De Dragon]

Semantics?

Before the ruling...Duke had a charge.
After the ruling he didn’t.....

You keep saying the courts can’t change law.....yet we are seeing where the judgement and appeals have changed the application of the law, and effectively removed and then replaced parts of the Sedition Act.

In different matter a judge is bound to apply law, sentence and judgment within the precedents set by higher courts.
In this way the law is modified gradually reflecting current ethos etc.
In some cases it moves the Statute law beyond its original scope.
Therefore parliament is not the sole source of law.

The chief magistrate dismissed Dukes case solely as a result of Seepersads decision.
Therefore law was changed.

Statute law is created by parliament.......Statute law evolves through Common or case law.
What we are seeing is the latter.

These are facts

What, pray tell did they replace it with? A Magistrate's Court suddenly has powers to replace parts of law ruled unconstitutional? Hugh Wooding is rolling in his grave at this travesty of an AG. You still haven't responded to whether it is more sensible to modify the law before it gets struck down in its entirety, rather than go through a sham process destined for failure at great expense. JUHN Scarfy and Arse-Wari love telling us that they sought SC, advice before CJ, Petrotrin, etc. what's holding them back now?
The colossal piece of fackery that was Section 34, where the slumbering Opposition PNM couldn't be bothered to examine fully and allowed to pass, was repealed in a week, so there is precedent.

[Redman]

Seepersads ruling struck down 2 sections of the act.
Duke case was dismissed.
The appeal reinstated them.

Where is stated that the act is to be repealed?

Modified,improved yes, but I don’t think it should be repealed.

[redmanjp]

law back in effect- in part due to that 'savings' clause

https://newsday.co.tt/2021/03/26/appeal-court-overturns-judges-ruling-sedition-still-law/

TT’s sedition laws are back in effect.

On Friday, Justices of Appeal Mark Mohammed, Charmaine Pemberton and Maria Wilson allowed the Attorney General’s appeal of a judge’s ruling which found that parts of that law were unconstitutional, as it infringed on the rights of citizens to freedom of expression, thought and freedom of the press.

The AG was not successful in one minor aspect of the appeal. In his decision in January, last year, Seepersad found sections 3 and 4 of the Sedition Act “patently inconsistent and at odds with Section 1 of the Constitution, which guarantees that Trinidad and Tobago is a sovereign, democratic state.

“In addition, they violate the rule of law because they lack certainty, are vague and so their status as law cannot be reasonably justified in this sovereign, democratic state,” the judge said. The effect of Seepersad's ruling meant that people could no longer be charged with the act of sedition.

In its ruling on Friday, the Court of Appeal held sections 3 and 4 of the Sedition Act did not violate the principles of legal certainty, and met the requirements of valid law.

The judges also held that the law defined the criminal offence with sufficient clarity, and anyone charged with the offence, with proper and competent legal counsel, could understand what conduct was prohibited.

Mohammed, who read out parts of the ruling at a virtual hearing, also said the savings law clause – a general clause in the Constitution that saves all pre-existing law from challenge, including those incompatible with the fundamental-rights guarantee also in the Constitution – saved the Sedition Act and can only be changed by Parliament.

Sat Maharaj and his media company, Central Broadcasting Services Ltd, filed the constitutional claim after Maharaj made certain statements on his Maha Sabha Strikes Back programme on TV Jaagriti on April 15, 2019. He said citizens living in Tobago were lazy and the men were rapists.

He had not been charged, but the Telecommunications Authority (TATT) considered the statements divisive and this led to an investigation by police to determine whether the statements were of a seditious nature. Police raided the CBSL’s offices on two occasions. Maharaj said he presumed he would be charged for sedition.

An originating summons was filed by his attorneys, but he died and the judge allowed his son Vjiay to replace his father as a claimant in the proceedings. The AG’s appeal of this substitution was dismissed by the Court of Appeal.

[paid_influencer]

hopefully, one day, in a generation smarter than us, a political movement based on Libertarian Ideals will start clawing back our freedoms and protections on the island.

In the mean time, race is issue #1, #2 and #3 for the electorate. Duncy head MCs still playing party hacks while the country turning into Venezuela