Displaying items by tag: justice

A long-running legal battle has concluded after the UK Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal concerning Kristie Higgs, a Christian teacher dismissed in 2018 for expressing her views on gender and sexuality in private Facebook posts. Higgs had shared a petition challenging government RSE policies and commented on two children’s books promoting gender fluidity. Though her comments were not related to her teaching, she was dismissed by the school, which claimed the issue was her language, not her beliefs. However, in February 2025, the Court of Appeal ruled that her dismissal amounted to unlawful religious discrimination, affirming that belief-based expression outside work is protected under the Equality Act. The Supreme Court’s refusal to revisit the case makes this ruling final. Higgs expressed relief, calling it a victory for Christian free speech. The Christian Legal Centre, which backed her case, hailed the decision as a landmark precedent safeguarding freedom of belief and speech for Christians in the UK workplace and beyond.

Three retired colonels have been sentenced to fifteen years in prison for orchestrating the 1982 killings of four Dutch journalists during El Salvador’s civil war. They are former defence minister Jose Guillermo Garcia (91), Francisco Moran (93), and Mario Adalberto Reyes Mena (85). The journalists had been filming with leftist rebels when ambushed by soldiers in a planned military trap. A 1993 UN truth commission had previously identified the ambush as orchestrated by Reyes, who remains in the USA despite an extradition request. Garcia and Moran are currently under police watch in a private hospital. The case was revived in 2018 after El Salvador's supreme court struck down a postwar amnesty. Advocacy from the victims’ families and international bodies, including the Dutch government and EU, pressured authorities to bring long-delayed justice.

Nicholas Prosper, 19, has been sentenced to 49 years in prison for murdering his mother and two siblings and planning Britain’s deadliest school shooting. The former school dropout meticulously planned a massacre at his old primary school, intending to kill thirty children and teachers. On 13 September 2024, Prosper shot and stabbed his family before heading towards the school. His plot was thwarted when police in a passing car noticed him acting suspiciously and arrested him. The court heard that he was obsessed with mass murder, child abuse, and online gore content, idolising past school shooters. He forged a gun licence to buy a shotgun and ammunition, using a loophole in UK firearms law. The government has now pledged to tighten gun laws in response. Prosper showed no remorse, expressing regret only that he had not killed more. The judge ruled that he might never be eligible for release.

An official inquiry will soon be launched into the June 2023 Nottingham attacks, when three people were killed by Valdo Calocane. Calocane, who also attempted to kill three others, was sentenced to an indefinite hospital order after admitting to manslaughter by diminished responsibility. Experts ruled that schizophrenia reduced his responsibility, but victims' families insist he 'got away with murder' and demand full accountability. The victims' families welcomed the inquiry, emphasising the urgent need for reforms in mental health care and public safety. A recent NHS England report found severe failures in Calocane’s care, including missed treatment opportunities and a failure to enforce medication. Keir Starmer assured the families that the statutory inquiry will be comprehensive and independent, with a retired judge leading the process to uncover the truth and drive systemic change.

The landmark trial in Avignon, involving the systematic drugging and rape of Gisèle Pelicot by 49 men orchestrated by her ex-husband Dominique Pelicot, has gripped the nation. The prosecution has sought a twenty-year sentence for Pelicot, who admitted to facilitating the assaults over nearly a decade, and 10-18 years for most co-defendants. The case has sparked national debates on consent, male violence, and systemic legal shortcomings. Prosecutors have highlighted Pelicot’s bravery in waiving her anonymity and allowing graphic evidence to be shown, confronting societal shame surrounding sexual violence. Feminist activists have rallied in support, condemning the accused and demanding justice. Defence lawyers, however, argue that many defendants were misled by Pelicot’s claims of his wife's consent. The trial has renewed calls for legal reforms, and Michel Barnier’s government has pledged new measures to combat violence against women. One commentator said: ‘This trial has affected every one of us. What have we done wrong as a society to produce men who are capable of such inhumane behaviour?’

Urfan Sharif, father of ten-year-old Sara, has admitted responsibility for her death during his murder trial at the Old Bailey. Sharif confessed to beating her with a metal pole and other objects, inflicting severe injuries leading to her death. Despite previously blaming his wife, he now admits he ‘takes full responsibility’. In the weeks before her death, he removed Sara from school, escalated physical punishment, and bound her with tape. At the time of her death, Sara was found with multiple fractures, burns, and severe external injuries. Although Sharif acknowledged he beat her, he maintains it was intended as 'discipline,' denying intent to kill. Despite his confession, he declined to change his not guilty plea to murder. Sharif, his wife, and his brother fled to Pakistan after her death but were arrested upon their return to the UK. The trial continues as the court seeks justice for Sara.

Federal prosecutors are increasing efforts to target suspects who use artificial intelligence (AI) tools to create or manipulate child sex abuse images, fearing that the technology could lead to a surge in illegal content. The Justice Department has initiated two criminal cases against individuals accused of such crimes. A department official has voiced concerns over the potential normalisation of such images, as AI makes it easier to create and distribute them. Prosecutors worry that AI-generated content will complicate the identification of real victims and make the task of law enforcement more difficult. These cases are likely to break new legal ground, especially when real children are not depicted. Convictions may face appeals as courts navigate the evolving legal landscape around AI and child exploitation.

Nationwide protests have disrupted hospital services in several Indian cities after the rape and murder of a 31-year-old trainee medic in West Bengal on 9 August. Thousands of doctors, led by the Federation of All India Medical Association (FAIMA), marched in Kolkata demanding better security and justice. The Indian Medical Association (IMA) also noted the poor working conditions, heavy workloads, and frequent violence faced by doctors in government hospitals. The protests, including an ‘indefinite’ strike by FAIMA, have severely affected hospital services: for example, over 8,000 government doctors in Maharashtra have halted work, except in emergency departments. Police have arrested a volunteer from their forces in connection with the crime, and the investigation has been transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation by a Kolkata high court, indicating the seriousness with which the case is being treated.

A BBC analysis has revealed extensive efforts by oil companies and public bodies to protect their premises from environmental protesters through civil injunctions. More than 400 protesters have  been named in orders affecting over 1,200 locations in England and Wales, including oil terminals and petrol stations. These injunctions also target ‘persons unknown’, which would allow anyone to be prosecuted. The unprecedented use of these injunctions has sparked debate, with oil companies and public bodies claiming they prevent dangerous protests, while lawyers for protesters argue they create a ‘privatised system of justice’ lacking criminal law safeguards. Breaching an injunction can lead to severe penalties, including imprisonment. Protesters argue that the injunctions unfairly limit their rights, and Friends of the Earth are now taking a case to the European Court of Human Rights, challenging their use. Legal aid limitations and potentially high legal costs deter many from contesting these orders.

A Texas immigration law, one of the nation's toughest ever, has been temporarily frozen by an appeals court. The law would empower officials to detain and prosecute individuals they suspect of entering the country illegally, overriding federal authority. Although the law briefly took effect during legal manoeuvres, a three-judge panel heard arguments on its constitutionality without issuing an immediate ruling. The Justice Department requested a delayed effective date if the law were to be upheld, intending to seek emergency action from the Supreme Court. Joe Biden's administration opposed the law, on the grounds that immigrant detention should remain in its hands. Mexico denounced the law as anti-immigrant, pledging not to accept individuals deported by Texas. The law’s potential reinstatement could signify a significant departure in immigration enforcement, challenging the traditional federal authority. Crossing the US border illegally is already a federal crime, but violations are usually handled as civil cases by the immigration courts.