The IRA and Mao's China: in the press

My piece on the IRA's, in the guise of Seamus Costello, approach to the Mao Zedong's China in 1964 was picked up by Clifford Coonan of The Irish Times, with whom I had an email exchange to expand on some issues before he wrote the piece.

I've just been made aware, however, that The Times also picked up (£) on the story, in what is a pretty garbled and incoherent account, complete with totally made up quotes from me!  (Google has informed me that HuffingtonPost.it ran with The Times story as well.

An Irish Financial Sanity Check

The Alphaville blog on the Financial Times makes a very important point:

"until your local stock market can adequately price one of your biggest banks, your local finance sector still has some way to go."

It draws attention to the massively inflated valuation of AIB on the Irish Stock Exchange.

 This follows a report in today's Irish Times, that Ireland is still the 5th most expensive country in the EU, with prices 15% above the European average.  Ireland is the 11th wealthiest country in the EU (based on GNI, a more reflective index than GDP in Ireland's case), at 5% above the European average.

The country's problems are so endemic, so culturally embedded and its politics and constitutional system so stunted, that it is going to take decades, if ever, for Ireland to fully put its house in order.

Ireland may have left the bailout, but it still has a heck of a long way to go.  I wish the country well, but sure as hell am glad I am not there any more.

Support Our Droops

RTÉ are cheerfully reporting that the British Tommies have been pilfering supplies to fill their johnnies. 

I couldn't help but think of this Second World War propaganda poster.

'Westerners are so convinced China is a dystopian hellscape they’ll share anything that confirms it'

That's the headline in a piece from Quartz.com, which is pretty much the same theme that I wrote about a few months ago.  This time it's the infamous 'video sunset', allegedly set up for the benefit of Beijing's residents who can no longer see the real thing due to the thick pollution.  This is, of course, a load of cobblers.

The photo is actually from a tourism advert for Shandong province, and is part of a 10-second long piece playing on a loop.  But, hey, if I were the photographer who took such a great shot, I would be tempted to put something out there that is going to get it published in many of the world's major news outlets (not that I am saying he did that, you understand, no, no, no...)

 

Oh East is East, and West is West

I listened the other day to an interview of Jamie Bryson, leading flegger shit-stirrer flag protester and putative European election candidate (that'll be a laugh).  Now wee Jamie is not exactly famous for his joined-up thinking (in fact there are probably those who would be pleasantly surprised if he has managed joined-up writing), but there was a section of the interview that got me thinking.

Jamie was asked to imagine a world where he was First Minister of Northern Ireland, and asked whether he would share government with Sinn Féin.  Unsurprisingly he immediately ruled it out; the interviewer (David McCann) pressed him if he would share government with parties linked to loyalist paramilitaries.  Here is Jamie's response:

Personally I believe that the IRA were terrorists who set out to destroy this country. Now if the British government had allowed the UDR, RUC and the British army to take on the IRA as they wanted to…there would never have been a need for the likes of the UVF. Unfortunately the British government did not let the good men of the UDR, RUC and the British army take on the IRA, so that is why Loyalist paramilitaries came into being.

David McCann then pointed out to Jamie that the UVF was formed in 1966 (partly in response to rising tensions surrounding the 50th anniversary of the Easter Rising), three years before the Provisional IRA came into existence in response to the Official IRA's failure to protect Catholic families and homes from loyalist mobs during rioting in Belfast in the summer of 1969 (1500 Catholics were forced from their homes), and from the predations of the RUC and the 'B' Specials (Ulster Special Constabulary) - the quasi-military, and almost exclusively Protestant, reserve police force of the RUC.  (I'm not trying to engage in what John Hume used to call 'whataboutery' here, just providing context for those who may not be familiar).  The depressing chronicle below provides ample context.

Martin Corey held for four years in prison without trial?

So says a BBC news report on his release.

This is a very sloppy piece of reporting by the BBC who appear to have fallen for Corey's supporters politically-charged spin on events, rather than the legal reality.

Corey was given a life sentence for murder.  As this guide from the Ministry of Justice makes explains:

Released lifers:

• are subject to a life licence which remains in force for the duration of their natural life;
•  
• may be recalled to prison at any time to continue serving their life sentence if it is considered necessary to protect the public

There has been all sorts of waffle put about by his sympathisers about the "lack of due process", that he never "faced a fair trial" or that he was "never questioned by the Police."  All of this, while true, completely misses the point: there is no need for him to be charged with anything to have his licence revoked, nor is there any need for him to be questioned by the Police about anything.

All that is needed is a recommendation by the Parole Commissioners that he has breached the conditions of his licence or is a danger to the public, and his licence is revoked and he returns to prison to continue serving his life sentence.  Corey did face trial, in 1972, and the four years he has spent in prison since 2010 are part of the sentence he received then.

Remember, these are the same Parole Commissioners who recommended his release, on licence, in 1992.  They have the authority to revoke it.  But a parole hearing is not a mini trial, and even with that, Mr. Corey did have a Special Advocate (a government appointed barrister with security clearance to view the confidential material which is withheld from Corey and his lawyers) appointed to represent his interests in the proceedings.

The initial decision by a single Parole Commissioner to revoke his licence was then reviewed by a panel of Commissioners, with the Special Advocate present to advance Mr. Corey's interests.  As the Supreme Court judgment that denied his application for judicial review of the decision noted:

On 15 August 2011 the panel gave its decision. This comprised both a closed and an open judgment. In a detailed ruling which formed part of the open judgment, the panel stated that it was satisfied that Mr Corey had become involved in the Continuity Irish Republican Army from early 2005 and that he was in a position of leadership in that organisation from 2008 until his recall to prison. It was concluded that the appellant posed a risk of serious harm to the public at the time of his recall. 

Mr. Corey's lawyers applied for judicial review of this decision, and at first instance the High Court held that Mr. Corey and his lawyers had been given insufficient details of the 'gist' of the alleged breaches of his licence that led to his being recalled to prison.  This was overturned on appeal by the Court of Appeal of Northern Ireland, which held that "the material provided to the appellant and his advisers was sufficient to allow him to give effective instructions to those representing him. There was therefore no breach of article 5(4) of the [European] Convention [on Human Rights]:

“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.”

There were technical arguments about whether the High Court had the authority to grant Corey bail after concluding that the original decision to revoke his licence had been unfair (the Supreme Court held, rightly in my opinion, that it did not), but the bottom line is that Martin Corey was not held for four years without trial, and it was not 'like internment'.

I am slightly uncomfortable about the fact that one of the conditions attached to his renewed licence is that he doesn't talk to the media, but I am understand the rationale behind it.  However, I doubt whether the blanket ban would withstand a challenge under Article 10 (Freedom of Expression) in the ECtHR.

In any case, this was a very poor piece of reporting from the BBC on this matter.

UPDATE: UTV are at it as well, describing his licence as 'bail conditions'.

Really Northern Ireland, if you are going to cover legal matters, don't use journalists who don't understand the law.

Oh, and

Law and Lawyers: Mark Duggan Inquest by Obiter J

A good post from Obiter J's blog:

Law and Lawyers: Mark Duggan Inquest: Mark Duggan 1981-2011 The evening of 4th August 2011.  At Ferry Lane (Tottenham, London), the Police intercepted and stopped a taxi (or ...

Who Killed Apartheid?

Who Killed Apartheid?

As a follow up to the post on Mandela, my friend Mike Levine shared this fascinating interview with me on Facebook.  It raises some interesting questions.  I have no doubt in my own mind that with the end of the Cold War the external and internal pressure on South Africa to democratise would have become irresistible, so that by the mid-90s, white minority rule would have been a thing of the past in any case.

The big question is what kind of South Africa would have replaced it?  As Howard Barrell asserts, the ANC's armed struggle gave them the moral and political authority to dominate the New South Africa and its creation, and put in place a constitutional and political system based on human and democratic rights that should stand as an inspiration to the rest of the world, as imperfect as it may be.

The big question, I suppose, is in the absence of that, would we have got the same South Africa, or something more closely resembling Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe, or worse still, Idi Amin's Uganda?

Mandela And His Legacy

NB: The videos embedded in this blogpost may not play on mobile devices.

The death of Nelson Mandela prompted an outpouring of tributes from around the world, and raised some interesting questions about his legacy and those of the conservative governments of the 1980s.  It has been been particularly interesting for me to observe the US media struggling with how to deal with Mandela's life history and worldview, and ultimately choosing to portray him as a Gandhi-like figure, for whom peaceful change was the goal, which is to completely misinterpret Mandela and his Long Walk to Freedom.  (As a side-note, Henry Kissinger once opined in conversations with the Chinese in 1971/2 that Gandhi's non-violence was a tactical not a philosophical decision, based on the nature of his opponent: the British).  Mandela's genius was to be able to react and change tactics as the circumstances allowed and dictated.

BPP: Business Priority Profits

Alex Aldridge over at Legal Cheek brought to my attention BPP's announcement that they were offering a "career guarantee" to new Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC) students, giving them the opportunity to take the Legal Practice Course (the route to becoming a solicitor) for free if within 12 months of completing the BPTC at BPP they have not obtained pupillage (the apprenticeship necessary for becoming a barrister) and take up the offer within that period.