A surprising verdict was handed down. In a judicial move rarely seen in wartime let alone peacetime, British military installations have been given permission by the High Court to quarter houses without any permission or notice.
A group of local council tenants in Leytonstone, east London, has lost a High Court battle to prevent military missile emplacements from being stationed on the roofs of high-rise buildings before and during the Olympics. The action to use residential areas as military bases was signed by the British Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, Home Secretary and Defense Secretary in “Defending the Kingdom''.
The residents were subsequently denied permission and their application for a judicial review was blocked, citing the national security nature of the incident.
Defense Secretary Philip Hammond was accused by residents of violating Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 1 of Protocol I. They protect an individual's right to peaceful enjoyment of his or her private life and home.
philip hammond
The Ministry of Defense never consulted residents beforehand. Additionally, the ruling against residents includes a number of new developments in favor of the military, including a “zero notification” policy under which the Ministry of Defense is not required to notify or consult residents in advance and is not under any legal obligation to residents. established a legal precedent. Any compensation will be given if they choose to seize private land to set up forward operating bases.
David Enright, a human rights lawyer and partner at Howe who represented the residents, explains the dangers of the new ruling: When governments (or military) take power over civilians, they never give it back. ”
Critics say the operation was deliberately delayed just three months into the match before being revealed, even though both the Ministry of Defense and government agencies had given seven years to prepare and plan the operation. They point out that the decision was left until the end of the month, limiting the amount of time they had to launch legal challenges against them.
Residents of the Fred Wigg skyscraper were concerned, among many other issues, that the skyscraper's surface-to-air missiles could become a terrorist target. The Ministry of Defense rejected their claims, saying the deployment of missiles as part of the Games' security measures was “lawful and appropriate.”
David Forsdick, appearing for the Ministry of Defence, said: “The Ministry of Defence, the intelligence community and the Metropolitan Police do not believe there is a credible terrorist threat to Fred Wigg Tower.”
The public can only wonder why surface-to-air missiles would have to be installed in homes during sporting events like the Olympics. To date, the nature of the threat posed has not been hinted at or adequately explained by government officials, leaving the public increasingly mystified as to why militarization is necessary. are.
It is somewhat ironic that the Ministry of Defence, intelligence services and the Metropolitan Police do not believe there is a credible terrorist threat to Fred Wigg Tower. This was probably true even before we installed missiles on roofs, and few would argue that it's still true.
Judge Haddon Cave, who is presiding over the case, argued that the Ministry of Defense had no duty to consult residents, nor was it responsible for relocating or compensating them as a result of internal military operations.
Ahead of the case hearing, it was also revealed that Judge Haddon Cave, who was appointed to the case, had apparent links to the Ministry of Defence. He worked for the Ministry of Defense, maintained a relationship with it, and even lectured for it. He declared his interest at the start of the trial, but for reasons unknown, his conflict of interest was not disputed.
In a case described as patronizing at its worst, Judge Haddon Cave said residents of Fred Wigg Tower were “shocked, alarmed and worried” by the possibility of missiles being placed on top of the building. but they claimed to have been below. He said there was “some misunderstanding” about the nature of the equipment being deployed and the risks it poses.
Judge Haddon Cave justified the MOD's reckless actions by arguing that there was no need for the MOD to negotiate with residents because there was “no other alternative location for the missiles.” Since then, residents and citizen advocates have argued that there are literally thousands of large open spaces, including parks, vacant office buildings, industrial waste sites, parking lots, construction sites, school playgrounds, and boats along the River Thames. They are trolling the judge's false claims. If “air defense” was indeed the main issue here, this would be enough. In addition to all these other options, there are hundreds of secure government buildings across London that can be used for military operations. Instead, the Ministry of Defense's decision to select residents' homes as domestic military bases places them firmly in the category of “human shields.”
Journalist Brian Whelan, 28, previously described how the British Army left crates of missiles, rockets and other munitions completely unprotected outside the entrance to his Lexington Tower home in Bow. A video showing the incident was posted on the Telegraph website. The Ministry of Defense responded to the report by claiming that the missile was a “dummy missile” and posed no danger to residents. Mr Whelan was quickly expelled from parliament after the report became public.
As a result of Mr Whelan's early eviction from his home in Bow, residents of Fred Wig Tower in Leytonstone feared they too would be made homeless for speaking out against state policy. They say they are afraid to talk to the media about their plight. Power Structure – A disturbing new trend that can only be described as institutional intimidation. This new reality was confirmed as reporters seeking comment from residents were met with a wall of silence.
In addition to the Ministry of Defense, British national television station BBC also occupied a number of council buildings in east London for Olympic-related media activities, clashing with residents and refusing to allow them access to their homes on at least one occasion. . Demotix.com recently reported:
Following a request from BBC Security, police refused the family access to their home in a high-rise tower overlooking the Olympic venue in Stratford for more than an hour, before being forced to admit they did not have the authority to do so. Ta.
Colin, who lives at Land Point on the Carpenters Estate in Stratford, led a group touring the estate on a tour organized by CARP (Carpenters Estates Against Regeneration) to the tower block, built in 1966. I had invited them to come to my apartment to see the high standard accommodation. A view of the entire site.
The BBC has leased the top five floors of the 22-storey block as a base for coverage of the Olympic and Paralympic Games. The group included a number of British and foreign journalists, photographers and television crews with an interest in the area.
This is the culmination of a wedge where eminent territory and martial law automatically deprive citizens of rights and remedies to which they would normally be entitled, but cannot do so because national security is invoked by the state.
From these events it is clear that Britain has officially entered a permanent state of war.
