Felons' interests count heavier than that of their victims
 

I have a new reason why to spit on the european institutions. Why must a sovereign nation like Germany care for some freakheaded judge's mad decision that the interests of still dangerous murderers and rapist have to wiegh heavier then the legimtiate interst of soceity to be protected from them? why do we even elect national politicians who form governments that on their behalf influence the personnel for the German Constitutional High Court, if that Court can be overruled by foreigners from other countries even on decisions that effect only Germany.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...695737,00.html

If people still are assessed to be dangerous, keep them locked. That simple. Which means arrest the EU's representatives and the EU court's judges asap.

the EU starts to look more and more like the United States of Europe:down:

cooperation between the European countries is good, but the EU just keeps getting more and more power.

So its the problem of attempting retroactive legislation which is always dodgy.
The cause of the problem is inadequate sentencing in the first place.
The easiest way round it is to have the prisoners sectioned under mental health laws.

Indeed, but that is a conflict that is very old. The ojne camps wanted to stay with a union of economically cooperating sovereign nations, while the other camp always wanted to abandon national sovereignity and repalace it with something like a European superstate. The latter camp won in momentum in the past 20 years, let's say: since the end of the cold war and German reunification - and with the disastrous results we have today.

It is an articial, unnatural enforcement of a pseudo-unity and uniformity that people simply do not want to have in europe. As a Dutch guest commentator in a German paper yesterday or the day before wrote: why should I sympathise with the idea of a union and a constitution that no person in europe can read in orfignal labguage, becasue it is not set down in one binding version, in one binding origianl langauge, but two dozens that all show variances in details? Why amd I expected to feel soldiartiy with people in Spain when they mismanage their economy, while I live in Northern Europe? why is there even the idea that such "soldiarity" could be expected to show up between total strangers with totally different living styles, national and social surrounding, who never met?

Europe means not only a canon of more or lsess shared values and hostirc traditons. It also means polenty od differences that also are historically founded, and may make a lot of sense on the regional level.

But some starry-eyed bureaucrats dream of a superstate instead. Et voilá, there we are.

Greece, btw, continues to order weapoins and military items like crazy, I just read. They have the money from the Greek bailout now, and 750 billion more are waiting to be consumed by some southern countries, so why starting to save money? They did not pay for fourt subamrines they had ordered, now haver ordered additonal two subs, plus more tanks - and the Eurofighter, that one they want as well, of course.

so much for consolidating their finances. and the Germans? Rumour says that the Germans even have pressed the Greek to order more weapons, and to pay for the already ordered ones.

It's all so sick and rotten an economy.

Wowh. I'm hijacking my own thread. :doh:

Actually, Germany and France agreed to sell Greece their weapons in exchange for the bailout project. They said that they would give money only if Greece didn't cancel the order for buying the faulty(!) German diesel submarines and also frigates, helicopters and more from France. It is not a rumour but it is all about money. Finally, the europeans agreed to lend Greece money with 5% interest when they only pay 1.5% for interests. So that you could say, without being (very) unjust that Germany and France are lending Greece money to buy their weapons. Of course, Greece (and i'm reffering to the politicians) is not innocent too.

Yes, that pissed me off big time too. Who do they think they are? Is Germany a sovereign state? Well I guess I have to answer that question with a clear: No!
Not any more.
We sold away our rights to act as we think fit.:damn:

The submarine thing I recall different. They had ordered 4 Type-214 and ordered for the modernisation of 3 old ones they already have. They never payed the modernisaton program, and the bill for the 4 new boats also is open, so the boats got withheld by Germany, while now German government was pushed by the defence lobby to use the bailout money for paying out Greek debts to German contractors first. The Greek then cancelled the modernisation of the old boats, and said they insist on the 4 German new boats being delivered, and now they want additionally 2 new 214s: six new boats they now want.

The financing should be done by germany almost alone, this they have copied from the Israelis demanding German systems for free, too (Israelis usually pay less than 20% of the prices in the treaties, the rest is payed by the German taxpayer: German taxpayers that way directly pay for Israeli defence. I wonder why they have not started to tax us directly).

The ridiculous argument is that when German defence industries produce them weapons for free (means: most of the money is financed by German extra fonds to boost the mutual friendship) and get payed by Germany, this German money investement would save German jobs. In other words: Germany should produce for free, should expect no payment, while German taxpayers pay for working for free.

Think of it. It really comes down to this simple principle. Politicians play ball with this in order to win elections by not loosing jobs.

Hilarious, absurd, rotten economy!

Hello,
maybe we don't have the EU for so long, anymore :O:
Greetings,
Catfish

Up and until this very moment, I was very supportive of criticism of the EU and still am. Yet when you gentlemen can't even get your institutions in order...ones that probably saved you a lot of trouble during the years...then one has no other option than to consider the possibility that there is more hot steam, than there is any real criticism or real suggestions for reform.

ECHR is part of the Council of Europe, an institution set up in 1948, whose primary goal is to protect human rights in Europe and it has done so. The fact that certain rulings are considered positive and the others not, is something natural to the rule of law. I am certain that you do not always agree with the rulings of your national courts, then why do you assault only the international, or in this case, regional ones?

I understand and I agree, that dangerous individuals are not to be on the streets. Yet this does not, in any way, invalidate the positive contribution to the state of Europe by the CoE and the ECHR.

Congratulations Sky....have you just woke up and smelt the coffee or is it simply a case of the shoe being on the other foot now? :DL

This is only one of many concerns for the British people....concerns that have been batted around the political halls of power for quite a few years now.

The British people (a good majority IMHO) still await a referendum as to whether we (the UK) should remain a member of the EU and your original post is a shining example as to why they're concerned.

That is funny.. That's what they do here in Canada too. Otherwise companies move to china.. So tax payers are paying high taxes to keep these companies here.. lol What a vicious circle. :nope:

@Respenus

The problem is that this court can overrule national laws. We have no way to control it. It can de facto dictate our laws and we can't do anything against it. Now we get forced to soften up national laws that guaranteed protection from dangerous felons and have to release these people into society again. All those who get the so called "Sicherungsverwahrung" (preventive detention) are known to be incurable and violent. It is very likely that they will murder and rape again. We are not talking about a court decision that causes financial trouble or inconvenience. We are talking about very dangerous people being let loose on society with the expected result being a few people turning up dead and/or raped.
There is a reason why this preventive detention was established and now some judge in a foreign country dictates us to stop it.
that's what pisses me off. The court is endangering all people in Germany and that is a crime in my opinion.

And I conceded to that point in my posts, did I not? But after having read the article, the rights of these people were violated, whatever the considered positive effect on society. You cannot be put in something akin to a jail, without being convicted before a court of law according to a law which was in force at that moment. The retro-activity and the fact that these people were in jail without being convicted is the main problem for the ECHR. Should Germany pass a law, allowing individuals to be convicted and put into preventive detention when there is enough proof (beyond any reasonable doubt), than there wouldn't be a problem.

I need to return once more to my original point. Go check what sentences were passed by the ECHR, where Germany was found guilty and tell me, how many of those would you consider positive and how many negative, based on a rational opinion and not just anger at the fact there is a court above you. That's the whole idea, so that I can go to the court, to seek protection of my human rights, even when the state does not ensure them. I know that for Slovenia, the ECHR has done some wonderful things, particularly concerning the judicial process. The supranationality of the court was agreed even before there was any EU, or better, at the time of the creation of the ECSC, the fore-runner to the current EU, which again, has nothing to do with the CoE.

And again, the fact that you may not agree with a single judgement, does not mean, that he thousands that are hidden from view, yet which have immeasurably increased the protection of your human rights and increased your standard of living (the ECJ in this case, if I may be allowed the jump), are any less valid, or that the system only passes such laws. Systems can be problematic at times (or today, almost constantly), yet the angry young men attitude, attacking for attacking sake, without offering any real alternative or even considering the other side of the argument, is something we need to avoid, you we (me, you, Sky and others) wish to reform the current system. That's all I'm saying. Rational discussion and proof will ensure our victory, not yelling and pointing fingers at the specific things which nag us in a particular way (And the rights of those German's truly were infringed upon, I was shocked when I read the report).

More like the European Union of Socialist Republics. In the states we can still vote the miscreants out. :O:

As a soveriegn state didn't Germany make this EU thing part of German law:yep:

Are these not new laws that were introduced after the agreement to follow the EU courts laws.
As I said earlier the fault lies with the initial sentences by German judges in German courts under German law.

The only issue the Brits have in this case is the questions about life=life ruling. Which will stand as many other EU countries have the same well established law. If by some strange quirk of circumstances that legal option should be overturned then there is still the minimum term which is open so there is nothing to stop a judge from giving 3 life terms with each of a minimum of 40 years to be served consecutive.
If by some miracle a nonce lasts those 120 years in prison then all it needs is a good doctor to section them all nice and legal for the rest of their natural.