Many of us have started to ask questions regarding the impartiality of our Judges, mainly due to what we witnessed during the Brexit process. The speed with which the “remain activists” cases reached the Supreme Court were phenomenal and the actions of the Judges during those cases certainly left many of us scratching our heads.
Some may say the Judge’s actions appeared akin to that of political activists working against the Government on behalf of the European Union – surely that could not be the case, could it?
To date, that question hangs in abeyance and we can only hope this Institution will come under scrutiny by the Boris Johnson Government at some point in the future.
This leads me on to a newly published report entitled:-
NGOs and the Judges of the European Court of Human Rights 2009 – 2019
“Non-Governmental Organisations have an increasing influence on and within International Institutions, particularly within the human rights protection system.
A report has recently been published which shows that at least 22 of the 100 permanent Judges who have served on the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) between 2009 and 2019 are former officials or collaborators of seven NGOs that are highly active before the Court.
Twelve judges are linked to the George Soros Open Society Foundation (OSF) network, 7 to the Helsinki committees, 5 to the International Commission of Jurists, 3 to Amnesty International, and one each to Human Rights Watch, Interights and the A.I.R.E. Centre.
The Open Society network is distinguished by the number of Judges linked to it and by the fact that it funds the other six organisations mentioned in this report.
Since 2009, there have been at least 185 cases in which at least 1 of these 7 NGOs is officially involved in the proceedings.
Of these, in 88 cases, Judges sat in a case in which the NGO with which they were linked was involved. For example, in the case of Big Brother Watch v. the United Kingdom, still pending before the Grand Chamber of the ECHR, 10 of the 16 applicants are NGOs funded by the OSF, as are 6 of the NGOs acting as third parties. Of the 17 judges who have sat in the Grand Chamber, 6 are linked to the applicant and intervening NGOs.
Over the same period, there were only 12 cases in which a judge withdrew from a case, apparently because of a link with an NGO involved in the case.
This situation calls into question the independence of the Court and the impartiality of the Judges and is contrary to the rules which the ECHR itself imposes on States in this area. It is all the more problematic as the Court’s power is exceptional.
Most of the Judges who were salaried employees or officials of NGOs came from Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Latvia and Romania. For example, in Albania, a poor and highly corrupted country, 2 of the 3 candidates for the Judge election in 2018 were leaders of the Open Society Foundation. One of them was elected.
The Open Society Foundation has invested more than $131 million in this country since 1992.
Likewise, the last 2 Judges elected in respect of Latvia are collaborators of the Riga Law School, founded by the Soros Foundation of Latvia, which invested more than $90 million in this country between 1992 and 2014.
The 2 latest Bulgarian Judges also come from NGOs supported by the Open Society Foundation and its foundations have become inescapable for anyone involved in social and media matters. They are major employers and funders. The OSF currently spends more than 90 million Euros per year in Europe, mainly in Eastern Europe and the Balkans.
On the lack of transparency
In the absence of transparency rules, it is difficult to know precisely all the cases in which NGOs are involved in the Court, in particular when they represent the applicants. The texts, both of the summaries of the cases and of the judgments published by the Court, only make it possible to identify some of them.
Analysis
This report exposes major conflicts of interest that were allowed to continue unchecked why? Is it a case of he who pays the piper calls the tune?
NGO’s or as they are often called “civil society organisations” are not democratic but keep turning up in their thousands to high level meetings such as Davos/Bilderberg and those organised by the United Nations.
I have recently reported on the United Nations Agenda 21/30 plan (attached) – it is reported that over 8,000 NGOs attended the 1992 Rio Summit which was the launch pad of the UN Agenda 21/30 plan.
It is contended by Rosa Koire of the Sustainability Institute that the goal of the UN Agenda 21/30 plan is ultimately to form a one world Government, total control from a central unit with the aim of destroying representative Government moving it to unelected Boards and Commissions.
It has been reported more members of NGOs are serving on Government delegations than ever before and have deeply penetrated official decision-making.
Just how much power do these NGOs have and indeed how much policy actually emanates from our elected Government?
These are questions I have a feeling may never be answered, or at least not willingly!
Is Rosa Koire correct in her contention about the UN plot to destroy representative Government moving it to unelected Boards and Commissions run from a central command unit?
One thing is for certain the findings of this latest report certainly gives more credence to her argument – doesn’t it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PrY7nFbwAY
https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/one-world-governance-common-purpose
I wrote my first article for Unity News Network on 30th December 2019, and I have been writing ever since – my library is now well in excess of 200 articles.
Alternative media is essential in these times of unprecedented censorship and mainstream bias, which has ramped up exponentially during the past 2 years. The overton window of “acceptable opinion” is growing every narrower.
Having a citizen’s log, cataloguing the twists and turns of life during these turbulent times is essential.
Thank you Unity News Network for allowing me a voice on your platform.
