John Hemming's Web Log

The link is to the judgment of the Irish Supreme Court on matters relating to the Hague Convention and adoption. A number of parents have won legal cases in Ireland which prevented their children being returned to England and placed in care on the basis that this would lead to adoption. This case was an interesting one because the children were not actually in care or even subject to a care order, but that care proceedings were "pending". (Viz an application had been made to court.) The first test in international public family law is one as to which country has jurisdiction. This is based on "habitual residence". It is now clearly the case that if court proceedings have started in England then the habitual residence is accepted as being in England even if the family have moved to Ireland. The case has also looked at the question as to whether non-Irish citizens have Irish Constitutional Rights, but without resolving the issue in any way. The judgment is a long ...

See the link for the website dealing with Florence Bellone's winning of the reporting prize for reporting on the English Family Courts scandal. Quoting from the website: Title of the article Great Britain: The Stolen Children Name of media RTBF The Grand Jury distinguished the report for its investigative merit in highlighting a human rights issue occurring in a highly-developed European Member State. The piece was characterised as ‘a technically impressive, investigative report into shocking and relatively unknown human rights violations’.

I attended St Edburgha'a carol service last Sunday. Robert Jones has produced some good photographs of the event. The music was good, but I don't think it is available on the net.

The link is to a story behind the paywall of the Sunday Times relating to Friday's jailing at around 4pm of Vicky Haigh for 3 years. On the way to the meeting in London (at which she asked a question of Anthony Douglas which was one of the reasons for which Doncaster MDC tried to have her imprisoned) she saw her daughter and went to say hello. At a time at which the press would not ordinarily be there on Friday she was given 3 years. Doesn't seem right to me. It remains that she has not yet managed to appeal the original family court decisions mainly because the solicitors are holding onto the file. It is also the case that the promised publication of various documents by the authories promised earlier this year has not happened. I suppose keeping her in jail will make it even harder for her to challenge the original decision.

There is a youtube channel Idowish12 which includes a lot of films of Birmingham's past. For example: and

The CTB v Imogen Thomas case raises a number of constitutional concerns about the accountability and reliability of secret justice. On 20th May 2011 the Neuberger Committee reported on secret justice clarifying what should happen. These procedures were not followed (in this case) on a number of occasions. On 2nd November 2011 there was a hearing which was not even listed. On 11th November 2011 the press were excluded without explanation. On 25th November 2011 there was a hearing with a decision for which no judgment was given until yesterday. The court should have clearly discharged the original injunction some months ago. The key issue, however, is that Secret Justice leads to miscarriages of justice. Secret Justice often means No Justice. In this case it is still unclear whether Imogen Thomas would have been able to prove her case had CTB not been named in parliament. What is clear is that the original injunction would have prevented Imogen Thomas’s lawyers from doing nec...

This link will give a video of the evidence session at Today's Education Select Committee (Martin Narey and myself).

I noticed in Le Monde over breakfast this morning that the Socialist candidate for France's presidential elections has said he will renegotiate the treaty. I have found the story in the online version of the newspaper and that is the link. When I told the Minister for Europe of this I was informed that it was on Radio 4 this morning.

The express story has been updated to include more than was in the printed story. It now includes the following comments from the British Association of Social Workers: Nishra Mansuri, of the British Association of Social Workers, recognised the whistleblower’s comments and said: “It’s a major concern. The cuts are creating so much pressure for social workers that the right decisions are not being taken. “We’re storing up so many problems, but the odds are against us.”

The link is to a story in Today's Sunday Telegraph about the many foreign children trapped in Childrens Services' kafkaesque world.

The link is to a story in today's Sunday Express about how misleading reports and psychobabble are used to destroy families. This is an extract: The whistleblower, a father who works for a large authority in the south of England, said: “We’re being pressured to go against what we think is right for families. “Personally, I’ve written reports and been told ‘You are too positive with this family. We’ll never get it to court unless you make it more negative’. “Although it goes against what you feel is right, you feel under an obligation.” He went on: “In order to get a child through to a child protection conference, we’re told to make the situation look bad, and worse than it actually is. “We don’t necessarily make things up but we can change the emphasis.” He said these reports were used to take children out of a family home and in many cases placed for adoption. “It destroys families, but the newer, younger social workers see this as the norm, they just want to toe the line with th...

A number of journalists have phoned me to ask my view as to the use of the veto. I think Cameron was right to use the veto on changes to the treaties. It is entirely right that the 17 Eurozone countries resolve how to get greater fiscal unity which is essential for the success of the Euro and consequential success of the UK. However, that does not mean that we have to sign up to that. We should not try to stand in their way and prevent them resolving their difficulties. However, it is not surprising that unanimity amongst the 27 EU states is difficult to achieve. When I tell the media this strangely enough they are not interested in interviewing me. The story they are looking for is "coalition in trouble over veto". I am not surprised at the editorial approach, however. The party is saying that he did not use a "veto". I suppose a "veto" is technically different to not agreeing something that needs unanimity. However, the effect is the same.

I wondered if Hansard had corrected what I thought was Ed Milliband's error at PMQs when he said: the dinner lady, the cleaner or the nurse, people who earn in a week what the Chancellor pays for his annual skiing holiday Indeed they have stuck with what he said. Perhaps it wasn't a mistake and he thinks that cleaners earn £11K per week.

The Autumn Statement was today. There are some innovative proposals in it (such as using QE for smaller businesses). I was concerned that we continued to protect the poorest in society. The cost of living has gone up substantially. I was concerned to ensure that the full inflation increase of 5.2% occurred for the poorest who find it hardest to make ends meet. Life is getting harder for many people across the world. However, we need to always remember the effect on the least well off who find it hardest to protect themselves against economic shifts. To that extent the government has been dealt a difficult hand, but is managing to play to well. The best test of the economy is to compare it to other similar countries. We are now doing better than countries which suffered from a similar deficit (according to OECD predictions - Italy, Greece, Portugal, Spain) and the Eurozone average. There will always be international pressures on the country. Those are the major cause of our curr...

This is another radio programme which looks at the wrongful abduction of children in England done by the state. It is, however, mainly in French. (including one of my interviews talking about constitutional procedures). It does include a recording of an arrest with french translation.

Last night's meeting on the issue of whether or not we have a directly elected mayor was an interesting experience. In the week beforehand I had expressed concern that there were too many speakers and it was unbalanced. I thought that having equal numbers of speakers from each side of the argument was good practice. The initial proposal was 7 speakers in favour (plus the chair also being a supporter) and 2 speakers against. I asked James Hutchings to come along, but initially the organisers didn't want him to speak. Finally they agreed to allow him to speak although Miles Weaver's tweet about it was " I spent far too much time sorting out John Hemming MP tonight & his whims. He is so out of touch, I accommodated his needs but planet, diff?" Personally I don't think it is a "whim" to ask for each side to have equal opportunities to speak. A balance of 7 (plus chair) against 2 is really nothing even close to equal. Even 7 (plus chair) against 3...

People campaigning for the release of Stuart Syvret were having a problem getting an e-petition tabled in support of my Early Day Motion. I, therefore, tried to get a motion tabled. It has taken about 2 weeks (and being raised at two select committees), but we now have the e-petition. That is here: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22394 There is also one in support of my EDM calling for the scrapping of the family justice review report here: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22695

The failure of the UK's judiciary in interpreting Article 8 of ECHR can be expressed as: "Joking about a footballer becomes a criminal offence, but the state is allowed to steal children from poor people at a whim." Not good.

The link is to three interviews with MEPs about the possibility of the European Parliament acting to review the malpractise in the English and Welsh family courts. (in French).

Court secrecy and injunctions act to undermine the rule of law. What is interesting in the courts at the moment is the revelation that many of the injunctions that were granted should not, in fact, been granted. A number of these were granted on the basis of allegations that were untrue and have not been substantiated. One of the problems with secret hearings (and we have still been having some unlisted hearings - something that is not supposed to happen) is that the judge cannot him or herself have confidence that the judge has heard all the evidence that is relevant to the case. One sided hearings (ex parte hearings) which are held in secret are perhaps the most unreliable forum in which decisions are made. One side puts their case. No-one else (other than the judge and the one side to the case) knows that it is happening. The judge then makes a decision. It was the case for many interim injunctions that a one sided secret hearing was all that happened and things then stopped. T...