Skip to main content

Legal aid as a tool of state oppression

Imagine a criminal court in which you are told that unless you plead guilty your lawyers will be taken off you and you will have to cope with all the procedures without any help.

What we have in the family courts (see link) is a situation where legal aid can be (and is from time to time) removed merely because people are uppity enough to want to disagree with the local council.

In this case (see link) the parents had legal aid refused and acted as litigants in person and won their case.

To me this is another really scandalous situation which the government are clearly responsible for.

The government's response is to change the law to ban the identification of the family concerned.

Dreadful.

Comments

Jerry said…
"Social workers from the council alleged that the family’s diet, which included fish but no meat or dairy products, was the cause of the boy’s rickets and said it could put him in future danger"

This shows that the Social Workers are profoundly diagnosing medical conditions without qualifications, time and time again do we see Social Workers becoming medical experts. GRRRRRRRR!!!!!!

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England. The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity. The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back. This is an issue that needs further work. In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.