Video download link



Summary: The cheapening of the concept of justice, even as the pandemic that serves to justify that cheapening is gradually being brought under control, is the real issue that should be debated in Haar (or from private homes, probably somewhere around Haar); whether it's compulsory or not ought to be a side question

FOLLOWING last night's publication we thought it would be worth doing a quick video, even if just to explain some of the context and interject personal opinions, experiences etc.

I'm not opposed to technology; au contraire!

But at the same time I strongly reject the idea of 'virtual' hearings, for a whole lot of different reasons. In fact, I strongly urge EPO workers to look up the well-known (and widely-publicised) issues associated with the practice, both from a human rights perspective and the principles of due process/access to justice. There's extensive literature on that subject. Generally speaking, the technology which now facilitates this isn't new at all; it's decades-old.

The Office has warped the question; instead of debating the legality of the practice they've all twisted it into a question like, should you seek the consent of both parties in a dispute when choosing to hold unlawful and unconstitutional 'hearings'?

"Generally speaking, the technology which now facilitates this isn't new at all; it's decades-old."Some time later today we shall publish "The EPO's War on Justice and Assault on the Law -- Part 10: A Faustian Pact?"

I drop some hints in the above video; I allude to people who sell out and betray their causes in pursuit of money -- quite likely the type of money they don't truly need and will likely lack time (given their age) to ever enjoy/spend fully. It is an ego trip. Like heavy metalists on hard drugs, except without the music and the needles. ⬆