Tuesday, February 1, 2011

How To Switch Fund Lic

The judiciary protected because Protective Case




The judiciary is a power.

"The essence of power is to protect" (Blaise Pascal). The clean, that is to say, an attribute that is not part of the concept, but is special to the concept. Because the power can oppress, it will still be power. It is made to protect and when it no longer protects it becomes tyrannical power, but power remains. At least if one considers the thought of Pascal as fair.

In cases where power protection, it must itself be protected. It is normal that those who devote themselves for the good of all, taking risks may be vital in turn protected by special laws. Therefore, Article 30 of the Act of July 29, 1881 specifically protects the body constituted defamation.

Defamation is the imputation of an act contrary to "honor or reputation." This fact can be proven or fabricated, the notion of defamation does not distinguish, it just undermines the honor or reputation, defamation is therefore "provided". However, in some cases, the defendant can escape conviction if it proves the truth of the facts in the case of corporate bodies, if these facts are themselves relative to functions, there will be no crime, or rather it has a justification. Apart from that, it is forbidden to slander, even publishing the proven facts. In this case, even the offer of proof will be prohibited (law of July 29, 1881).

is in this context that I publish my posts on my blog and in this context that the weekly "Le Point" publishes an article on Freemasonry and justice. While the article is to read.

accordance the law, I do not publish an excerpt:

"Michele Alliot-Marie also had necessarily heard of a story that has polluted the debate within the Supreme Council of Magistrates (CSM) leaving. One of its members was simultaneously involved in a private family matters and received a favorable ruling from the court of Appeal of Toulouse, broken since the Court of Cassation. The defendant member of CSM, as the chairman of the bench of Toulouse, know and are both Masons. At the same time, an end to subsidies is brought before the Paris court against the magistrate member of the CSM. A fairly trivial issue, held during the summer of 2010. Banal? Not really, because the prosecuting officer is under pressure such that the prosecutor personally deplore. The invisible hand in this case, proved too insistent. "

The invisible hand has been too insistent or too little of it related characters to be effective. In fact, there has been a continuation of the authors of "pressure"? Because these "pressures" that are specifically crimes.

It is amusing (or appalling, but I'm more appalled long time) to read as representative of the prosecution was under pressure from other judges. Our virtuous magistrates union, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) only care about the independence of the government, which would result they believe that judges could not be legitimately regarded as judges when they depend on the Government (for lack of obvious logic), but virtuously close eye on real pressures immoral because to bias.

In general, and exceptions, women are more honest, more loyal than men. This is true among the corps of judges. And it is a litigant robbed and defamed by court decisions that tells you. I could publish decisions surreal, surreal and many decisions that the explanation is not only the lack of culture and intelligence of their posters.

0 comments:

Post a Comment