Yet another example that proves the UN isn’t fit for purpose

Tony Ellis, lawyer to ratbags

A ratbag in prison has found himself a crusading lawyer who has run off to the UN to get a verdict, despite said ratbag requesting the time in solitary himself:

In 2000, inmate John Vogel was confined to a cell for drug offending; he asked for 21 days – six days longer than legally allowed – to help him deal with his addiction.

Vogel’s lawyer Tony Ellis lodged a complaint with the United Nations Committee in 2015 after a series of legal setbacks in New Zealand.   

An advance copy of the committee’s decision provided to Dr Ellis has found the solitary confinement contravened international human rights law.

The committee ruled the punishment was disproportionate, particularly given Vogel was known to “be suffering from chronic depression and that he had a drug addiction”.

It noted that Vogel was kept in his cell for 23 hours a day with just one hour set aside for exercising and showering.

“He had no access to radio or television … he had no right to make telephone calls or receive visitors.”

The Crown argued that the confinement was at Vogel’s request and the conditions were humane.

The UN committee urged the government to provide “fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full a rehabilitation as possible” and to report back within 90 days.

How does get fucked sound?

This tosser requested the time in solitary confinement, was duly provided it, and now is whinging that he was tortured…oh puuuuulease.

A fair and adequate compensation would be say $100 per day, less board and supervisions…oh look he owes the taxpayer a couple of grand.

Of course the ratbag wants more than that.

Dr Ellis said he believed it was the first victory any New Zealander had achieved before the committee.

He said Vogel was “very pleased” and hoped he might be permitted day-release as part of his rehabilitation.

Dr Ellis said $10,000 to $20,000 would be a reasonable sum of compensation.

The decision runs counter to the High Court and Court of Appeal which both found the punishment did not amount to torture or cruel treatment.

In 2004, the High Court accepted that Vogel should not have been confined for 21 days, but ruled it did not breach his rights as Vogel had requested the length of time and there was no evidence it had caused him pain or suffering.

In 2013, the Court of Appeal said Vogel’s request was irrelevant and found he had not been treated with humanity or respect. However it declined to go any further or award compensation.

A year later, the Supreme Court tossed out an application for a further appeal, prompting Dr Ellis to go to the UN Committee Against Torture.

Dr Ellis said the UN committee’s decision should act as a wake-up call for New Zealand’s courts.

“This shows that the Supreme Court simply got it wrong – as did the courts below.”

No they didn’t. The UN is not fit for purpose. The courts got it right, and the UN has no jurisdictions, so he can get fucked.

What is delicious though is this happened under Helen Clark’s government and now Jacinda Ardern’s gets to fix it.

Vogel was sentenced in 1988 to life in prison for murdering Peter Hoey in Auckland.

He was released on parole after a decade, but was recalled to prison in January 2000 after further offending.

Vogel is currently in Auckland South Corrections Facility.

He should be in a  box, and the government should ignore the numpties at the UN.

 

-Radio NZ

 


Do you want:

  • Ad-free access?
  • Access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • Access to daily sudoku?
  • Access to Incite Politics magazine articles?
  • Access to podcasts?
  • Access to political polls?

Our subscribers’ financial support is the reason why we have been able to offer our latest service; Audio blogs. 

Click Here  to support us and watch the number of services grow.

As much at home writing editorials as being the subject of them, Cam has won awards, including the Canon Media Award for his work on the Len Brown/Bevan Chuang story. When he’s not creating the news, he tends to be in it, with protagonists using the courts, media and social media to deliver financial as well as death threats.

They say that news is something that someone, somewhere, wants kept quiet. Cam Slater doesn’t do quiet and, as a result, he is a polarising, controversial but highly effective journalist who takes no prisoners.

He is fearless in his pursuit of a story.

Love him or loathe him, you can’t ignore him.

To read Cam’s previous articles click on his name in blue.

39%