| Home | Bookmark | Tell | Active petitions in over 75 countries | World Times |
Grant an appeal for Marika and give him the chance of a fair trial |
200 Signatures |
Published by Birgit on Jul 18, 2007
Category: Justice
Region: United Kingdom
Target: Justice Department
Web site: http://www.pacifikana.com
Description/History:
Marika was sentenced to 16 months in prison (serving 8 months) for opposing discrimination in the army. He and a colleague were discriminated against and verbally abused and an altercation ensued between them and a group of British army soldiers. While simply defending himself, he injured two fellow soldiers and as a result was imprisoned after, what he considers an unfair trial.
Marika wished to plead not guilty and acted in self defence. His lawyer tried to convince him to plead guilty and advised him that he would be kicked out of the army and sent to prison for a long time if he did not plead guilty.
This lawyer was no longer supposed to represent him after he realised, on the day of the trial, that he was representing the other side’s witness in a sex offence. A barrister took over and again tried to convince Marika to plead guilty, telling him if he chose to plead not guilty he could face severe punishment. He did not fully explain the consequences (he would lose his right to claim self defence) of pleading guilty to Marika.
On the day of his sentencing his original lawyer arrived to represent him again. No one was sure who was now supposed to be representing Marika, especially when the lawyer revealed that the barrister still had all the paperwork for the case. These circumstances were vastly unsettling for Marika in, what was already, a very stressful situation.
Marika had difficulty following the law jargon because of his lack of English and the only thing he really understood was that if he did not plead guilty he would be dismissed from the army. It was never mentioned that he acted in self defence and that he did not start the fight. His side of the story was never heard.
Marika maintained, as stated in the interviews, that he was acting in self defence. He believes that witnesses lied to the court and statements were exaggerated. Marika pleaded guilty because he was led to believe that this would help him to keep his career and to protect his future in the army.
As a result, he was sentenced to 16 months in prison (serving 8 months) and dismissed from the army.
His first appeal at the Court Martial Appeal Court was denied by a single judge.
His human rights were violated. According to Article 6 of the European Rights Convention it is a fundamental requirement that if a defendant in criminal proceedings does not have sufficient knowledge of the language in which the proceedings are conducted he must be provided with an interpreter from the time when the investigations begin.
An interpreter should have been provided for the following purposes:
•Dealing with the interviews and understanding the legal advice given
•Understanding the caution and its implications
•Preparation for the case
•Understanding the implications when Marika was advised to plead guilty
•Providing information to others
•Understanding the court martial proceedings
Marika wished to plead not guilty and acted in self defence. His lawyer tried to convince him to plead guilty and advised him that he would be kicked out of the army and sent to prison for a long time if he did not plead guilty.
This lawyer was no longer supposed to represent him after he realised, on the day of the trial, that he was representing the other side’s witness in a sex offence. A barrister took over and again tried to convince Marika to plead guilty, telling him if he chose to plead not guilty he could face severe punishment. He did not fully explain the consequences (he would lose his right to claim self defence) of pleading guilty to Marika.
On the day of his sentencing his original lawyer arrived to represent him again. No one was sure who was now supposed to be representing Marika, especially when the lawyer revealed that the barrister still had all the paperwork for the case. These circumstances were vastly unsettling for Marika in, what was already, a very stressful situation.
Marika had difficulty following the law jargon because of his lack of English and the only thing he really understood was that if he did not plead guilty he would be dismissed from the army. It was never mentioned that he acted in self defence and that he did not start the fight. His side of the story was never heard.
Marika maintained, as stated in the interviews, that he was acting in self defence. He believes that witnesses lied to the court and statements were exaggerated. Marika pleaded guilty because he was led to believe that this would help him to keep his career and to protect his future in the army.
As a result, he was sentenced to 16 months in prison (serving 8 months) and dismissed from the army.
His first appeal at the Court Martial Appeal Court was denied by a single judge.
His human rights were violated. According to Article 6 of the European Rights Convention it is a fundamental requirement that if a defendant in criminal proceedings does not have sufficient knowledge of the language in which the proceedings are conducted he must be provided with an interpreter from the time when the investigations begin.
An interpreter should have been provided for the following purposes:
•Dealing with the interviews and understanding the legal advice given
•Understanding the caution and its implications
•Preparation for the case
•Understanding the implications when Marika was advised to plead guilty
•Providing information to others
•Understanding the court martial proceedings
Petition:
We, the undersigned, call the Justice Department to grant Marika's appeal and a new trial conducted because:
•he was never provided with in interpreter (breach of Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights)
•failure of the court martial to resolve his equivocal plea
•continued representation of the defendant by his solicitor when there was a conflict of interests
Everybody has the right to a fair trial, and so does Marika.
•he was never provided with in interpreter (breach of Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights)
•failure of the court martial to resolve his equivocal plea
•continued representation of the defendant by his solicitor when there was a conflict of interests
Everybody has the right to a fair trial, and so does Marika.
The Grant an appeal for Marika and give him the chance of a fair trial petition to Justice Department was written by Birgit and is hosted free of charge at GoPetition.
Promote this petition with a popular social bookmarking service [?]:
To link to this petition, copy the following code to your site:
