The Armchair News Blog

Two examples of what is wrong with British justice.

1. An Islamist activist was sentenced to four and a half years in prison for terrorism offences. Abu Izzadeen, 32, was found gulity of fundraising for terrorists and inciting acts of terrorism abroad. Five other men were also sentenced for similar offences.

So, they were imprisoned because they had an opinion…. an opinion which was far too unpalatable for the British, so, in the eye of the law, they have committed an offence. Right?

WRONG!

The law as it stands on this is very confusing. Talking about committing terrorist acts and actually committing terrorist acts are two completely different things. Yet the government seems too determined to blur the boundaries of difference when it comes to the so-called war on terror. No wonder ministers are finding it difficult trying to convince MPs to support a raised limit for police to hold suspects without charge to 42 days.

2. A high-flying City lawyer driven from her job after an 18-month campaign of bullying could receive millions in compensation. Gill Switalski, 51, had won a sex discrimination claim from her former employers F&C Asset Management. She is claiming around £19million for psychiatric damage, loss of earnings, pension rights and career prospects.

It’s right that she has to claim compensation from her former bosses…. but not for that much. F&C were initially wrong, but are right to appeal against this high level of compensation. It’s ridiculous that some people who know the law can try to rig it on order to get what they want, while many others who are less fortunate cannot afford to get genuine legal representation for more serious cases.