Brunei

Alexa: We should stop selling weapons to immoral regimes

We should stop selling weapons to other countries. There are plenty of other goods to make - that we and others sorely need.

Ellen, homosexuality is not chosen, but simply is. People cannot change themselves into not being gay. Do they not deserve to find a partner and to be happy and settled just as heterosexual people do? Or should they be condemned into a long, lonely, single life or the sham of a heterosexual marriage. They will have to choose one or the other if they are to avoid being stoned to death in Brunei.

"The question of our own justice system is a different one. Many punishments appear to be too lenient in my view. That is probably a whole new thread."
maddyone yes, that is a red herring and nothing to do with this.

I do feel that any country in the Commonwealth should be expelled if it has these types of punishments, because capital punishment and cutting off hands or feet is never acceptable in my opinion. I do not think we should dignify the leaders of such countries by allowing them to meet our Queen at State Banquets and so on. But of course there are many countries which are abusing human rights that are not in the Commonwealth, and for my money, we shouldn’t entertain them either.

The question of our own justice system is a different one. Many punishments appear to be too lenient in my view. That is probably a whole new thread.

Yes, and ?

"Why expel a Commonwealth country because of what their own do in the form of punishment to a " certain section " of their people"

Because to be a member of the Commonwealth a country has to adhere to certain rules regarding human rights.
As mentioned earlier in the thread.

The suggestion countries should not express opinion on the policy and culture of others is daft. Is there a serious suggestion that people in other countries shouldn’t comment on the level of drug, alcohol abuse or the way that impacts on our educational attainments and crime levels? Can I no longer express the wish the Uk would follow other countries in having a more effective criminal justice system. No I don’t mean Brunei or Sharia law, I favour the more creative compassionate and effective approach
Shown by some Scandinavian countries, or the Netherlands.
I wouldn’t visit a country that
Stoned people to death. I was delighted to see the demonstration outside one of the sultans hotels in London yesterday,

Why expel a Commonwealth country because of what their own do in the form of punishment to a " certain section " of their people ??
If it spilled over to this country, then yes, by all means punish them for barbarism----stick 'em in prison !

If those offenders in Brunei know what they'll be faced with then why do it ( rolls eyes )?

I hear a government minister interviewed earlier today. His view was that the UK can't impose sanctions or use other methods to try and influence Brunei to abandon barbaric practices. The reason he gave was that Brunei is a poor country and the poor would suffer
That is astonishing and very ill-informed!
Could it be that the actual oil wealth has not trickled down to the people? That being say, I understand that education, welfare, housing etc is generally good.

The only thing that will hurt the Sultan is the threat of expulsion from the Commonwealth so he can no longer hob-nob with the Queen and other members of the Royal Family.

I have to agree with GabriellaG here. There is no deterrent whatsoever in this country against the most heinous of crimes. It's just prison for whatever crime has been committed from petty thieving to murder. Something's radically wrong with our justice system, which needs to be shaken up along with some of its old fuddy duddy judges.

Plus the jury should be given intelligence tests before they're chosen. There's a lot wrong with our archaic system, hence the daily murders !

What does make me " smile " is the fact that other countries are barbaric in their punishments, but we, in our supposedly civilised society used to hang innocent people until the early 60's which isn't that far back.

GabriellaG54 has asked posters politely to respect her name.

Gabriella, nick names indicate trust and friendship. For my part you may call me anything you like as long as you don't abuse me.

Duly noted GG and apologies in advance for the fact I will continue to use the abbreviation.

My name is NOT GABBY, nor GG. Use my full name or don't write posts to me.

My posts on this thread are quite clear. Each country makes it's own laws by which residents and visitors have to abide.
I think that is perfectly acceptable whether you agree or not.
You would hardly agree to others having a say in our laws...now would you?
If you don't understand that point well, that's not my problem. It's couched in quite simple language and is in line with the thread content.
I did not say that having an adulterous or homosexual relationship is wrong and should be punished by stoning (to death)
I said that if you follow the laws of the country then you have nothing to fear.
If they have an abhorrence of homosexuality or adultery, that is up to them, not up to us to interfere in a country with a different set of rules
In Malta, divorce is frowned upon and thought to be a stain.
Here...it's anything goes. Our morals are hardly cause for celebration. They're shameful.

PS Gabby, It is probably the case that some employees of human rights organisations are not disinterested, there are even criminals who embezzle . However the broad picture is that the human welfare motive often cannot coexist with the profit motive.

Gabriella wrote:

"Lawyers make a fair living from dispensing their wisdom...at a price.
They are tasked with upholding the human rights of their clients whilst making a profit for themselves."

It's true that upholding human rights costs money.

GG "If you don't do wrong" you say - so in your book having an adulterous or homosexual relationship represents doing something "wrong" and can justifiably merit being stoned to death. Theft is a crime but I think many people would agree that it doesn't warrant a person's hand or arm being amputated. Such actions are akin to what we saw in Margaret Attwood's Handmaid's Tale (which she said could be seen as an extension of certain attitudes and behaviours that can arise from theocratic societies). Most people expressed their absolute horror at such a dystopian vision. They are also the sort of barbaric actions that were carried out by ISIS and widely condemned.

Draconian laws do not necessarily reduce crime rates, though admittedly the threat of having a hand cut off may deter petty criminals. Countries where there is more emphasis on rehabilitation and restorative justice generally have lower crime figures and less recidivism.

GG no one on here is arguing against the view that you should observe the laws and customs of a country you visit. Nor are we saying that there isn’t an issue about crime in this country or that there aren’t issues with our CJS ( although I expect many of us woukd be more balanced and nuanced in our views). I really don’t know what the point of your latest posts are quite frankly.

Each country/state has it's own rules and, if we travel there, it's incumbent upon us to be aware of their rules and customs before setting foot on their soil.

If you don't do wrong you have nothing to fear.
Here in the UK you have nothing to fear anyway.

On the whole, people are sick of soft touch Britain and so would you be if one if yours had suffered robbery, intimidation, rape etc and had a soft or suspended sentence.
Imagine your mum being robbed at knifepoint in her own home or your GC assaulted on their way home from school and the psychological scars which would follow. Then, to compound their distress, imagine hearing that the accused had been given a suspended sentence or community service or even a 6 week jail sentence.
Would that scenario be your idea of justice?

According to what I've read, Brunei is wealthy and is on the list of of "developed" countries.

Aside from the reputational damage to Brunei and its monarch, if economic/trade sanctions were widely applied, they would, to some degree, affect the country's economy. But we have not been at all reluctant to apply sanctions to much poorer countries when we don't approve of their politics - including preventing them from having access to vital medicines and medical equipment - so why not Brunei?

GG I would much rather have what you describe as "soft touch Blighty* than a regime that tortures, murders, disables and disfigures people.

Brunei a poor country? Was that Grayling you heard Iam?

Well said mcem - simple justice that's what we need NOT.

Discussing the best way of influencing Brunei against the barbaric policy of stoning LGBT people, adulterers, etc to death just isn't in the same league as invading Iraq EV. Even you must see that.

I hear a government minister interviewed earlier today. His view was that the UK can't impose sanctions or use other methods to try and influence Brunei to abandon barbaric practices. The reason he gave was that Brunei is a poor country and the poor would suffer. Oil anyone?

Post @ 21.34 was in reply to Alexa