Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Mr Abdulhadi Alsaffar, who attended one of our regular series of seminars at House of Lords on Bahrai, seen here at the seminar in December 2008, was arrested today. There seems to be a link between those who have attend our seminars and all the recent arrests. The message is that if you go abroad to express your opinion on Bahrain's political situation - which you can't do at home - there will be severe consequences. The security authorities have explicitly threatened that they will reach all of those involved in such activities.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
This is a useful initiative, as there is a lot of interest throughout the world in legal questions arising from the use of legislation passed in 1973, not entirely in conformity with international standards developed over the last four decades, exemplified by the Rome Statute on the International Criminal Court which came into effect on July 1, 2002.
Diagnoses: EVAR repair (July 2010)
Past stage I MALT lymphoma
Ischaemic heart disease - coronary artery bypass graft (1995)
Barrett's oesophagus and gastritis (2001)
Colon injury from RTA - colostomy reversed (2001)
Peripheral vascular disease - angioplasty right leg
Osteopenia - fracture right hip (October 2009)
domperidone 10 mg mane
aspirin 75mg mane
Calceos two tablets od
bisoprolol 2.5mg - stopped
omeprazole 20mg mane
atorvastatin l0 mg nocte
zopiclone 3.75mg nocte
I reviewed this gentleman in the Outpatient Clinic this morning (August 9), three weeks after his aortic aneurysm surgery, when he temporarily went in to atrial fibrillation. I gather his blood pressure was a little difficult to control at the time of surgery but Lord Avebury thinks he was rather excessively sensitive to betablockers which were stopped at the time of his discharge. He has been monitoring his blood pressure at home and it is clearly high with systolics going up to 187 mm Hg. He himself is currently well and I note his pulse in clinic was regular, 55 per minute, blood pressure 143/57.
I have requested a repeat of his inflammatory markers as suggested in his discharge summary which are now normal: ESR 18mm/h, CRP <5.0, though his Hb is 8.5g, WCC low (3.53) and platelets high (581) and I know you are going to be reviewing him at the end of this week. His Hb was similarly low when checked last month. His notes show that he has been seen in the Haematology Department for previously unexplained anaemia while Mr R is seeing him shortly and I wonder if this drop in Hb is the result of his surgery. However he was remarkably asymptomatic for this degree of anaemia.
I have taken the liberty of giving him a prescription for bendroflumethiazide 2.5mg daily to start to address his hypertension. I was somewhat surprised that his discharge medication of 2.5mg bisoprolol had caused him problems and it is likely that he will need another antihypertensive agent to control his blood pressure adequately. Lord Avebury is not too keen to try bisoprolol or other beta blockers again; alternatives would be a calcium channel blocker or ACE inhibitor but 1 will leave that to your discretion.
He is due his next zolendronate infusion in March 2011 and has an appointment for review in this Clinic in four month's time.
Spoke to the GP on the telephone on Monday. He cancelled the bendroflumethiazide and re-prescribed bisoprolol, which has reduced the systolic to a maximum of 151 in the last two days. I am to ring the GP next Tuesday to confirm the current medication.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
500 flood survivors from Ahmadiya community denied shelter, relief goods
MUZAFFARABAD: The government and local clerics refused to shelter around 500 flood-affected families belonging to the Ahmadiya community in
For its part, the government claims that all relief goods are being distributed among survivors without discrimination. And that all survivors have been sheltered in relief camps without distinction. The flood-devastated families from the Ahmadiya community have strongly criticised the government’s “discriminatory attitude” even at a time when the entire country is reeling from the ravages of the worst flooding in living memory.
Of the 500 Ahmadi families, 350 belong to DG Khan, 60 to Muzaffargarh and 65 to Rajanpur district. According to Ahmadiya community leaders, over 2,500 members of their community have been displaced and are now living with their relatives while some of them have left for Rabwah, the community’s headquarters.
Aziz Ahmad Khan, a local leader of flood victims from the Ahmadiya community in DG Khan, told The Express Tribune that all members of his family have complained of discrimination in DG Khan. He said 200 families from Basti Rindan and Basti Sohrani, 60 from Chah Ismaeel Wala, three from Rakh Mor Jangi, 18 from Ghazi Ghat and 12 from Jhakar Imam Shah of Ahmadpur. Khan alleged that 200 families, who have been displaced from Basti Rindan and Basti Sohrani by flooding, took shelter in a state-run school at Jhok Utra but within days the local administration forced them to leave the school. He said the local administration later told them that people from the surrounding areas did not want the Ahmadis in the relief camp. And that the administration could not allow them to stay at the camp as it could create a law and order situation.
“So we left our cattle and other belongings in the area and took refuge in the homes of our community members on higher grounds,” he said, adding that some of them even migrated to Chanabnagar.
Muhammad Iqbal Sohrani, a member of the Ahmadiya community told The Express Tribune that around 40 Ahmadi families who took shelter in a state-run school at Jhakar Imam Shah near Sumandri, some 40 kilometres from DG Khan, have not received any relief either from philanthropists or from the government. He alleged that relief packages were being distributed through local lawmakers who have been told by the district administration that the Ahmadis are not eligible for any support.
Saleem Chandia, another Ahmadiya community member, said that he along with 40 other community members rented a house but after two days their landlord was forced by local clerics to evict them. Chandia said they were offered help by their own community members after wandering for several days in search of shelter.
Mansoor Ahmad, a resident of Muzaffargarh, told The Express Tribune that over 800 members of the Ahmadiya community were displaced from Bait Nasirabad, Masroornagar, Hussainwala and Shahjamal. At least 100 members of the community, from Hussainwala and Masroorabad, were trapped at Shahjamal. He claimed that they had asked the district police officer (DPO) and the district coordination officer (DCO) to provide them a boat or to rescue the trapped people but they did not take notice.
Ahmad claimed that the trapped Ahmadis were rescued by their fellows on a broken boat. He said local clerics have issued an edict that the Ahmadis should not be provided help.
Naseem Ahmad, from Rajanpur, told The Express Tribune that their 500 community members from the areas of Basti Lashari, Basti Allahdad Dareeshak and from Basti Azizabad were displaced. Their houses were washed away and the government and local clerics ignored them. He said that they were not allowed to stay in state-run schools or in camps, therefore the majority of them were living on the rooftops of their inundated houses.
“The Ahmadiya community itself rescued trapped people and delivered relief to them,” community spokesperson Saleem-ul-Din told The Express Tribune by phone.
He said that the community did not want any relief package from the government for its members. However, the government should protect the property and livestock of the Ahmadis.
Hassan Iqbal, Commissioner DG Khan, told The Express Tribunethat he would check the situation. He asked the Ahmadis to directly approach him if they face discrimination anywhere in the district. However, DCO Muzaffargarh Farasat Iqbal said that the Ahmadis have not contacted him.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 18th, 2010.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
The seven Baha’i leaders who had been detained in Tehran’s fearsome Evin prison for 20 months without charge have finally been sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment after they were finally accused of espionage, propaganda against the Islamic order and establishment of an illegal administration.
These convictions were handed down after the defendants were allowed one hour’s consultation with their lawyer, and after several brief court appearances in which no evidence was presented on any of the charges.
The facts are at news.bahai.org/story/
PS The Foreign Secretary, the Rt Hon William Hague MP, has issued the following statement:
"I was appalled to hear of the 20 year prison sentence handed out to the seven spiritual leaders of the Bahá’í faith in Iran. This is a shocking example of the Iranian state’s continued discrimination against the Bahá’ís. It is completely unacceptable.
The Iranian judiciary has repeatedly failed to allay international and domestic concerns that these seven men and women are guilty of anything other than practising their faith. It is clear that from arrest to sentencing, the Iranian authorities did not follow even their own due process, let alone the international standards to which Iran is committed. The accused were denied proper access to lawyers, and there is evidence that the trial was neither fair nor transparent.
I call on the Iranian authorities urgently to consider any appeal against this decision, and to cease the harassment of the Bahá’í community. I further call on the Iranian Government to ensure that the rights of all individuals are fully protected, without discrimination, and that it fulfils its obligations to its own citizens as set out in the Iranian constitution."
The news of a 'confession' on TV by Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, almost certainly extracted by torture, has further horrified even Iran's allies such as Brazil. Ms Ashtiani had been held in Tabriz Prison for the previous four years, and had been sentenced to death by stoning for adultery but acquitted of murder before she was paraded on TV, in an obvious attempt to convince the outside world that she deserves the execution which is probably imminent. The regime has never attempted to justify the penalty of stoning to death for adultery, prescribed by one school of Islamic jurisprudence but only carried out in Iran. (www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-10956520). This is an utterly hateful and inhumane law, and there is no authority for it in the Qur'an. In the Sunna there is a story about the stoning of two Jews who were found guilty of adultery, but that was the punishment dictated by the Torah at the time, and perhaps applied to Muslims for the sake of uniformity in Medina. Fortunately, the rest of the world has moved on from the standards of the 7th century, and its time for Iran to follow their example. See Mohamed S El-Awa, Punishment in Islamic Law, American Trust Publications, Indianapolis, 1982
Sunday, August 08, 2010
It seems that one or two readers of my blog have illogically come to the conclusion that calling for the
“While the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act may have been largely based on international standards at the time of its drafting, international criminal law has evolved significantly since, including with the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 1998 and its coming into force after ratification by 60 states in 2002. The
Nobody accuses the IBA or HRW of lacking sympathy with the victims of 1971, and I hope even at this late hour that Sheikh Hasina’s government will amend the 1973 Act in accordance with the advice given by internationally renowned experts, so that the outcome of the trials will be unimpeachable.
Friday, August 06, 2010
Third, barrister Muhammad Molla and Md Nazrul Islam, British supporters of the Jamaat Islami in Bangladesh, mainly to discuss the war crimes trials in Bangladesh. So far, five leaders of the JI have been arrested on blasphemy charges, and then charged under the War Crimes Act while they were in custody. The Parliamentary Human Rights Group had asked the International Bar Association to comment on the compatibility of the Act of 1973 with modern internationally accepted standards of war crimes legislation and they had recommended a number of amendments. The PHRG had drawn this to the attention of the Bangladesh government, asking them to consider these recommendations, and although they did so, no changes were made to the 1973 Act. Our discussion concerned mainly the possibility of getting international observers - and the IBA would be an obvious choice if they were willing - to observe the trials, and comment not only on the effects of sticking to the 1973 legislation, but also the rules of procedure and evidence which have been developed uniquely for these trials, and the conditions under which the defendants have been remanded for much longer than the three days stipulated by the law.
The PHRG is not against the trial of the 1971 war criminals, but wishes to ensure that the process should not be open to criticism.
Second, my friend Tajammul Hussain, originally from Pakistan. We talked about the Prime Minister's reference to the links between the Pakistani intelligence body the ISI, and the Taliban, and agreed that although the connection had been discussed extensively in the media, the more so after detailed evidence had been published in Wikileaks, it was unwise of him to raise the subject while he was visiting India.
We talked also about the refusal of the Foreign Office to help secure fair compensation for his unfair dismissal by UNHCR, after he blew the whistle on their failure to audit expenditure of hundreds of millions of $. He used the UN appeals machinery, and although UNAT the appeal tribunal found in his favour, the paltry sum they awarded for totally inadequate compared with the ruin of his accounting career. The UN doesn't provide any mechanism for challenging the decisions of UNAT, analogous to the provision in English law for judicial review by the High Court of manifestly wrongful decisions of tribunals. How can this be remedied, when the victim's government point blank refuses to take up the cudgels on his behalf? That's what we have to consider.
Thursday, August 05, 2010
- Type I - Perigraft leakage at proximal or distal graft attachment sites (near the renal and iliac arteries)
- Type II - Retrograde flow from collateral branches such as the lumbar, testicular and inferior mesenteric arteries
- Type III - Leakage between different parts of the stent (at the anastomosis between components)
- Type IV - Leakage through the graft wall due to the quality of the graft material
- Type V - Leakage from unknown origin