KUWG on Twitter

Thursday, 21 July 2016

'Extremist Disruption Orders' and Benefit Sanctions

Peter Tatchell draws attention to the potential perils of Conservative Government's 'Extremist Disruption Orders':

Minister comes up with 10 different definitions in just over 60 minutes

Extremism Disruption Orders – Conflicting, inconsistent definitions

EDOs are a dangerous threat to free speech & political dissent

London, UK – 19 July 2016
“The government’s planned Extremism Disruption Orders (EDOs) are so vague and ill-defined that they are a potential threat to free speech and dissenting opinions. When questioned by the UK parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) on 29 June, the then counter extremism minister, Karen Bradley MP, offered ten different definitions of extremism in just over 60 minutes. The government wants to penalise extremism before it has even agreed what it is. This renders EDOs both anti-democratic and ineffectual. They are not consistent with human rights law,” said Anastasia Kyriacou, the advocacy officer of the Peter Tatchell Foundation.
Watch this video of the government minister trying but failing ten times to offer a clear and consistent definition of extremism:

The government has belatedly agreed with demands by the Defend Free Speech campaign for a public consultation on EDOs – although a date and timetable has not yet been set.... Continued on Peter Tatchell Foundation website.(1)
Cited in the same Peter Tatchell blog post, Peter Calvert — Campaign Director of the Defend Free Speech campaign — says:
“The Defend Free Speech campaign, and many of the groups associated with it, are greatly concerned that the proposed 'civil orders regime' will damage both security and civil liberties. They risk distracting the authorities away from terrorism and violence and into monitoring and punishing legitimate expressions of opinion...."
The State has already started clamping down on not only 'legitimate expressions of opinion', but also the rights of benefit claimants to be accompanied to DWP interviews as in the trumped up charges against Tony Cox of Scottish Unemployed Workers Network.(2) Kilburn Unemployed Workers Network members are also well aware of Kilburn Jobcentre management and security's addiction to calling out the cops to attempt to get us to disperse and not point out what is going on in that building.
About 3,500 results (0.64 seconds)(3)
There is virtually no reporting or acknowledgement of the facts of benefit sanctions on BBC TV News, yet facts regarding benefit sanctions are outlined in a recent Kwug Blog post, The new Prime Minister as ultimate mandator of safeguarding for vulnerable people.(4) 
That outline, however, omits reference to UN investigators' concerns about 'access to due process' and 'access to justice' for benefit sanctions victims.(5) Maybe this Government will resolve the matter of that opposition to the corporate homicides committed under benefit sanctions will be to declare the UN investigators outside extremists or international terrorists?(6)
Personally, I would regard not taking any kind of action against such atrocities a fundamental attack against the nature of society and of community. "It is not freedom from conditions; it is freedom to act against those conditions."

Dude Swheatie of Kwug

Link addresses

  1. http://www.petertatchellfoundation.org/free-speech/government-can-t-define-extremism-wants-penalise-it
  2. https://scottishunemployedworkers.net/2016/06/23/class-justice/
  3. https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=IH2QV_D3Gcvb8AfO1rzYBA&gws_rd=ssl#q=%22benefit+sanctions%22+site:+http:%2F%2Fkilburnunemployed.blogspot.co.uk
  4. http://kilburnunemployed.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/the-new-pm-as-ultimate-mandator-of-safeguarding-for-vulnerable-people.html
  5. http://kilburnunemployed.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/camerons-16m-mansion-un-criticism-of-ex-pm-legacy-for-poor.html
  6. https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=VYOQV5ClM9Db8AePs6nAAw&gws_rd=ssl#q=benefit+sanctions+deaths

No comments:

Post a Comment