BENT JUDGES CAN BE PROSECUTED.
“The general rules of judicial immunity do not extend to giving a judge or magistrate an open licence to be corrupt or oppressive. Corruption would be a ground for prosecution. Oppressive conduct would result in the removal of a magistrate, and the same fate might befall an oppressive judge.” [‘Foundations of law Constitutional and administrative law de Smith’ – Fourth Edition – pages 372 & 373 – published by Penguin Education]
A very nuanced analysis which raises some very pertinent questions here over big business, brand image exploitation, post-retirement judicial conduct and how well they should sit together. In a functional democracy no one can have their cake and eat it too, without manifesting a conflict of interest, at least in theory, perhaps if not so much in practice. I hope this story goes viral and generates much-needed debate, discussion and ultimately, some measure of social reform and proper accountability.
So (h/t Gregg Callus) there is a very interesting story in the Scotsman about potential impending tobacco litigation. Philip Morris wants, we are told, to claim £11bn for the forthcoming requirements that death sticks have to be sold in plain packaging with pictures of cancerous growths on them. I resist the urge to make this a compensation culture, human rights gone mad story because the story appears to be as least partially true. Here are some excerpts from the report:
TOBACCO giant Philip Morris is to launch the biggest corporate compensation case in history against the UK and Scottish Governments over the decision to impose plain packaging on cigarettes….
Legal advice from former Advocate General of Scotland Lord Davidson of Glen Clova and retired judge Lord Hoffman says the policy breaches international law on image rights…
View original post 772 more words