Skip to content

Judicial Abuse

Lawfare A Weapon Of War

A report released by Common Frontiers and the Progressive International systematically outlines how Lawfare, or the abuse of legal systems as an instrument of war, is being used against democracy in Latin America. In response to progressive politicians winning at the ballot box across Latin America, oligarchic elites have been forced to regroup and deploy new strategies to maintain their hold on power. In collusion with the US Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigations, a new form of hybrid war, Lawfare, is being unleashed across the Americas to destabilize and stop the wave of progressive governments.

Supreme Court Liberals Help Turn Judges Into Prosecutors

So the truth is out: the three so-called liberals on the supreme court are phonies. More precisely, they, like most of their conservative brethren, are corporate hacks. We learned this a couple of weeks ago, when the high court ruled against Steven Donziger, a climate-activist attorney, long persecuted and then literally prosecuted by Chevron. In a pro-corporate decision about as subtle as a heart attack, seven of the nine justices declined to hear Donziger’s appeal of a criminal contempt decision involving his representation of Indigenous Ecuadorians against Chevron. Two far-right justices dissented.

UK Government Refuses To Release Information About Assange Judge Who Has 96% Extradition Record

Declassified has also discovered that the judge, Vanessa Baraitser, has ordered extradition in 96% of the cases she has presided over for which information is publicly available. Baraitser was appointed a district judge in October 2011 based at the Chief Magistrate’s Office in London, after being admitted as a solicitor in 1994. Next to no other information is available about her in the public domain. A request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was sent by Declassified to the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) on 28 February 2020 requesting a list of all the cases on which Baraitser has ruled since she was appointed in 2011. The MOJ noted in response that it was obliged to send a reply within 20 working days.  Two months later, on 29 April 2020, an information officer at the HM Courts and Tribunals Service responded that it could “confirm” that it held “some of the information that you have requested”.  But the request was rejected since the officer claimed it was not consistent with the Constitutional Reform Act. “The judiciary is not a public body for the purposes of FOIA… and requests asking to disclose all the cases a named judge ruled on are therefore outside the scope of the FOIA,” the officer stated.

Urgent End Of Year Fundraising Campaign

Online donations are back! Keep independent media alive. 

Due to the attacks on our fiscal sponsor, we were unable to raise funds online for nearly two years.  As the bills pile up, your help is needed now to cover the monthly costs of operating Popular Resistance.

Urgent End Of Year Fundraising Campaign

Online donations are back! 

Keep independent media alive. 

Due to the attacks on our fiscal sponsor, we were unable to raise funds online for nearly two years.  As the bills pile up, your help is needed now to cover the monthly costs of operating Popular Resistance.

Sign Up To Our Daily Digest

Independent media outlets are being suppressed and dropped by corporations like Google, Facebook and Twitter. Sign up for our daily email digest before it’s too late so you don’t miss the latest movement news.