Tokyo District Court officials on Sunday removed tents erected by two antinuclear campaigners and other activists after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear crisis from the premises of the economy ministry, which oversees the nuclear power industry.
The removal of the three tents came after the government asked the court to enforce its order for the tents’ dismantlement.
The court’s order, made in February 2015, was upheld by the Tokyo High Court last October. It became final after the Supreme Court in July turned down an appeal filed by the two antinuclear campaigners.
The three tents were set up in September 2011 on a plot of land of about 50 square meters. They have been used as a base to conduct antinuclear activities outside the ministry in the wake of the triple meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant in March 2011, with activists uploading live video footage online, staging a hunger strike and forming human chains.
The forcible removal by the court officials took place in the early hours of Sunday. About 10 citizens including some who were staying in the tents overnight protested while the officials put fences around the encampment and blocked the road around the premises before disassembling the tents.
A 53-year-old company employee who had been staying in one of the tents on Saturdays since the first tent was erected nearly five years ago, said, “The government is pushing through the reactivation of nuclear power plants without taking responsibility (for the Fukushima disaster). We will carry on with our protests.”
The Tokyo District Court in its ruling last year also ordered the activists to pay roughly 21,000 yen ($209) per day in fees for using the land for as long as they remained. The unpaid amount exceeds 30 million yen.
The district court said that while it “understands the campaigners’ compelling motive to join antinuclear activities after the nuclear accident that inflicted severe damage on many people,” they “do not have special rights to use the land” of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry in central Tokyo.
Hundreds of demonstrators marched from Causeway Bay to Admiralty on Sunday to protest against a government decision to disqualify mainly pro-independence candidates from running in next month’s Legco elections.
The Civil Human Rights Front, which organised the rally, said the move by election officials was political censorship.
Alice Lai, who wants Hong Kong to return to British rule, is one of the six disqualified candidates. She said she was taking part to defend freedom of speech.
She said in future, the government might not just disqualify candidates from standing. It might also disqualify voters from voting.
The Civil Human Rights Front said more than 1,300 people took part. Police put the figure at 760 during the peak period.
Anarchists are set to stage protests at next weekend’s Notting Hill Carnival over ‘police brutality’ against black people – sparking fears for the safety of one million revellers.
Hard-left activists plan to ‘celebrate black resistance’ at Europe’s biggest street festival. Veteran anarchist group Class War is promoting the protests.
There will also be a march in memory of black people killed by police in both the UK and the US, where the Black Lives Matter movement emerged.
One British offshoot of Black Lives Matter has called for a ‘lively intervention’ at the carnival.
The London Black Revolutionaries – blamed for violent clashes at Downing Street after last year’s Election – is also calling for a ‘fight against social cleansing and gentrification’.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3751154/Black-lives-matter-threat-Notting-Hill-Carnival-Anarchists-set-stage-protests-police-brutality.html#ixzz4HyuaR5Ns
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
A Muslim landlord who attacked his Christian tenant with a metal pipe and broke her leg during a discussion about their religion, which had escalated into an argument, was remanded for sentencing after he was denied bail in the Kingston and St Andrew Parish Court last week
Milton Lazarus, 28, of Red Hills in St Andrew also pleaded guilty to destroying the complainant’s flat-screen television and figurines.
The court also heard that Lazarus forced the complainant to give up her tenancy. But this was denied by the complainant who pleaded not guilty to breaching the Rent Restriction Act.
However, Lazarus pleaded guilty to malicious destruction of property and to aggravated assault last Wednesday when he appeared before Senior Parish Judge Judith Pusey, and a sentencing date was scheduled for September 21.
According to the police, on May 28 the complainant and Lazarus were at home have a discussion pertaining to Christianity and Islam when it turned into an argument.
During the argument, Lazarus threw a metal pipe and hit the complainant in her head and on her leg, causing the leg to break.
Lazarus also damaged a flat-screen television, valued at $45,000, and some figurines belonging to the complainant.
The matter was reported and he was arrested and charged.
Last Wednesday when the matter was mentioned, Attorney Davorna Wilson tried to get bail for Lazarus.
But the prosecutor objected on the grounds that Lazarus has been involved in a number of violent incidents in his community.
Wilson, however, persisted by asking the judge to offer him bail with conditions that would ensure that he refrains from getting in any further incident.
But the magistrate refused.
“What will I tell the complainant’s children if I grant bail to a man who is known to be violent and she turns up dead?” the judge asked.
“This is not just an intellectual exercise,” Judge Pusey said, while pointing out that parish judges have to know what is happening in their parish and have to grant bail based on the circumstances.
After he was denied bail, Lazarus told the court that he had pleaded guilty from the last court date, hence he was pleaded.
He was then asked if he was willing to compensate the complainant for her damaged good and he agreed. He was subsequently told to bring $50,000 to court to pay over to the complainant on the date of his sentencing.
A Muslim man being detained at a Yokohama immigration center was served pork and has gone on a hunger strike in protest.
The 48-year-old man from Pakistan who is being detained for unknown reasons was served a hot meal that contained processed ham on the evening of Aug 3 and has now been on a hunger strike for two weeks. People of Islamic faith are forbidden to eat any kind of meat from pigs.
The man is currently only consuming water and nutritional supplements but immigration officials say the man’s health is not in any danger.
A similar incident occurred last year in August where another Muslim man was served a salad with bacon pieces. On this occasion the Yokohama area immigration apologized for the “administrative mistake”.
A group defending the human rights of foreigners visited the immigration department this week to request that actions are taken to prevent this kind off incident from occurring again.
A representative of the group said, “The immigration office has the responsibility to provide meals with religious customs in mind, and we request that this doesn’t happen again.” The immigration department responded by saying, “We regret that this has happened and we are swiftly investigating the cause”.
Sources: Hachima Kiko, NHK
Barbara Ellen: do we seriously think that a female teacher sleeping
with a male pupil is on a par with a male teacher sleeping
with a girl pupil? I don’t.
Two evil sisters who sexually abused a boy when he was aged just six and then again when he was a teenager have been spared jail – because they are both DEAF.
Julie Fellows, 30, and her sister Jennifer, 32, targeted the youngster over a period spanning 14 years.
But a judge today went against guidelines and ruled that it wouldn’t be fair to jail the pair – who have never learnt to lip read – as they would not be able to communicate properly in prison and effectively mean they were in isolation.
He also cited the fact that sign language isn’t available in prison – and that one of the defendants was pregnant – as reasons not to jail the sick pair.
Both had previously been told to expect “very significant sentences” for their vile abuse.
The court had heard Julie was aged 14 when she lured the young boy, aged six, into a petrol station toilets in 2000 where she touched herself intimately.
On another occasion she performed a sex act on the victim who thought the behaviour was “the norm” because it happened so frequently.
Julie also had sex with the boy on a sofa several years later when he was aged 14 while her boyfriend asleep in the the same property.
The abuse only stopped when the victim spoke to friends and realised the behaviour wasn’t normal.