Latest news with #HCJ
AllAfrica
4 days ago
- Politics
- AllAfrica
Is West's corruption fight in Ukraine veering into colonialism?
Ukraine's former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko recently called for an end to what she called the Western 'colonial model' of interference in Ukraine's domestic politics. In a speech to the Ukrainian parliament in July, she welcomed the passage of a law bringing two anti-corruption bodies under greater government control (which led to protests across the country and eventually government backtracking). She described it as the first step towards the restoration of the country's sovereignty and called for lawmakers to go further. Tymoshenko was referring to the role played by foreigners – mainly representatives of Western donors supporting Ukraine's political reforms – in approving appointments to key Ukrainian state institutions. This practice is one of the measures that Ukraine has introduced to tackle corruption. Its purpose is to introduce external scrutiny to ensure the independence of the organisations and especially the judges who deal with allegations of corruption. One example of this is the Ethics Council. Created in 2021 by a law passed by Ukraine's parliament, it is composed of six members: three Ukrainians and three foreigners. The council vets nominations for the High Council of Justice (HCJ), which is the most important institution in Ukraine's judiciary. The HCJ not only appoints judges but also makes decisions on their suspension and arrest when they are accused of wrongdoing. While the membership of the Ethics Council is equally divided between Ukrainian and foreign members, in practice, the votes of the foreigners are weighted more heavily than those of the Ukrainians. This means that its foreign members can veto any nomination that comes before the council. At first glance, Tymoshenko's critique of this type of international oversight seems reasonable. Why should a sovereign state subject its own internal processes – especially processes of such sensitivity as judicial appointments – to close scrutiny by foreign citizens? In a recent interview with the Times newspaper, Tymoshenko elaborated on her speech, arguing that these measures exist because of pressure from Western governments and international organisations. She also pointed to 'threats' to withdraw support, especially financial support, if Ukraine does not comply. Ukraine's international donors have certainly made it clear that they expect Kyiv to undertake judicial reform and other meaningful measures to tackle corruption. The International Monetary Fund routinely reviews Ukraine's progress in these areas when it decides whether to release of the next tranche of funding. Since the start of Russia's full- scale invasion in 2022, Ukraine has received approximately US$12.8 billion from the IMF. Ukraine's former prime minister argues that there's too much Western involvement in domestic affairs in her country. Similarly, the European Union has made addressing corruption and ensuring the independence of the judiciary key conditions for Ukraine to progress towards full EU membership. Volodymyr Zelensky's government cannot afford to risk losing the money Ukraine receives from international donors such as the IMF, which helps to keep the country's economy functioning while it is at war. Neither can he afford to ignore the requirements of EU membership. Joining the European Union is a goal that Zelensky has championed for Ukraine. It is also very popular among Ukrainians. According to a May 2024 opinion survey, 90% of Ukrainians would like to see Ukraine join the EU by 2030. But Western pressure is not the only reason for foreign oversight of key institutions and processes in Ukraine. It is a step that has received strong support from Ukrainian civil society. The Dejure Foundation, a Ukrainian legal organization that promotes the rule of law and judicial reform, regards the involvement of international experts as essential to ensure a professional and independent legal system. External scrutiny is also regarded as a way of increasing public trust in the judiciary. A December 2024 opinion poll found that only 12% of Ukrainians trust the courts, mainly because of perceptions that judges are corrupt. To be sure, the involvement of foreign experts is not a magic bullet. Even supporters of the measure claim that foreigners lack the knowledge of the local context and can be manipulated into supporting bad decisions. But supporters argue that international scrutiny should be supplemented by greater involvement of Ukrainian civil society organisations, not removed. The issue of corruption and how to address it remains a live one in Ukraine, and has no straightforward solution. The introduction of international legal experts into the process of scrutinising key appointments has not eliminated the problem or restored public faith in the judiciary. Zelensky and his government are coming under increasing pressure from Tymoshenko and her supporters' attempts to make political capital out of the issue. In particular, her call to remove foreigners from these roles and replace them with war veterans is a clear appeal to nationalist sentiment. On the other hand, Ukrainians do not seem to object to meeting the requirements of Western organizations. More than 70% of Ukrainians surveyed in 2023 agreed that it was right that the EU should require political reforms before opening negotiations for Ukraine's accession. Moreover, protests erupted in July in cities across Ukraine against the legislation that would have brought Ukraine's national anti-corruption bodies under the direct control of the government-appointed prosecutor general. Zelensky has now submitted a new bill to reinstate the agencies' independence. These demonstrations revealed a strength of feeling against any dilution of the independence of those who are charged with dealing with corruption. This suggests that Tymoshenko may not gain much traction in any attempts to dismantle existing systems, however imperfect they may be. Jennifer Mathers, Senior Lecturer in International Politics, Aberystwyth University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
ITV News
5 days ago
- Health
- ITV News
Jersey health officials say termination of bus contract 'will not impact' cancer patients
Jersey health officials have defended ending a £56,600 contract for a bus service for cancer patients, citing declining service use and value for money. The Daisy Bus Service provides transport for patients from Jersey and the Isle of Wight travelling to the University Hospital Southampton for cancer treatment. However, the NHS and Wessex Cancer Support have confirmed the service will end on Wednesday 20 August. Health and Care Jersey (HCJ), which allocates the £56,600 annually, decided to discontinue the service following a review which found that it was not the "best value for money". HCJ also found it was more "economical" for patients to use HCJ-funded taxis instead, as they can be used anytime, whereas the bus was on a timetabled service. Emily Hoban, the Head of Access for HCJ, stated: "A notable decline in Jersey patients using the service this year meant that the Daisy Bus was operating at a cost of around £60 per passenger journey. "This is significantly higher than the average cost of a £19 taxi journey. "The termination of the Daisy Bus contract will not impact Jersey patients as all taxis are already booked and paid for directly by HCJ's Travel Office." "All patients who currently use the Daisy Bus Service will be made aware of their new travel arrangements when the service discontinues." The termination will also impact patients from the Isle of Wight who are staying in mainland hotels and use the service. However, in a joint statement, Wessex Cancer Support and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust said there would be alternative support to be used by cancer patients. They said: "We want to reassure patients that support remains available through NHS schemes for those who meet eligibility criteria. "This includes help with travel costs through the NHS Healthcare Travel Costs Scheme (HTCS) and access to Non-Emergency Patient Transport Services (NEPTS) for eligible patients. "The Daisy Bus service between Portsmouth ferry terminal and Queen Alexandra Hospital in Portsmouth will continue at this time. "All partners are working closely to communicate with affected patients and to ensure they know what support is available through the NHS."
Hindustan Times
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
SC rules one rank one pension for ex-HC judges, says discrimination violates equality
New Delhi, The Supreme Court on Monday directed uniform pension benefits for all retired high court judges, irrespective of their mode of appointment or tenure, saying "one rank one pension has to be the norm in respect of a constitutional office". A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices Augustine George Masih and K Vinod Chandran held that any classification in pension benefits based on whether judges came from the bar or district judiciary, or whether they were permanent or additional judges, was discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. 'One rank one pension has to be the norm in respect of a constitutional office,' the CJI, writing a 63-page judgement, said. Dealing with six issues over the disparity in pensionary and other retiral benefits to high court judges, the top court ruled that they must be granted pensions calculated at a basic annual amount of ₹13.50 lakh whereas the retired chief justices would be entitled to ₹15 lakh per annum. 'The principle of one rank one pension requires all retired judges of the high court to be paid a uniform pension. We find that once a judge assumes the office of the high court judge and enters into a constitutional class, i.e., the class of a high court judge, no differential treatment would be permissible merely on the ground of date of appointment,' it added. When a high court judge is in office, the bench said, irrespective of their source of entry, they are entitled to the same salary and perquisites. 'When all the judges of the high courts, when in office, are entitled to the same salary, perks and benefits, any discrimination amongst them on the ground of their source of entry, in our view, would be patently discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India,' it said. The services of a judicial officer who becomes a high court judge from the judicial services so also the experience of a Member of the Bar who becomes a high court judge from the Bar is required to be taken into consideration, it said. 'That break-in service for a period between the date of retirement as a District Judge and the date of assuming the office as a high court judge cannot be a ground for denial of pension on the basis of salary drawn as a high court Judge. The pension of even such Judges has to be on the basis of the salary drawn as HC judges,' it said. A person who retires as a high court judge even if he was appointed in the state judiciary after the New Pension Scheme came into effect would still be entitled to benefit of GPF under the HCJ [The High Court Judges Act, 1954], it said. Referring to judgements, it said there was a common thread in all of them barring any discrimination in payment of pension. The bench also dealt with the issue of whether full pension could be denied to a high court judge on the ground that there was a break in service between the date of retirement as a district judge and the date of assuming office as a high court judge. On whether retired high court judges who entered the state judiciary after the NPS came into effect would be entitled to receive pension as high court Judges, the bench they should get the equal pension. Dealing with the consequential issue on how the amount contributed by such judges and the state respectively under NPS would be treated, the court said, 'We find that, it will be equitable to direct the states to refund the amount contributed by such judges along with the dividend accrued thereon. Insofar as the contribution made by the state along with the dividend accrued thereon is concerned, it should be credited to the account of state." The judges, bench pointed out, who retired as additional judges, would also get the pension like permanent high court judges. 'The perusal of the definition would show that the definition of a 'Judge' is wide enough to include a Chief Justice, an acting Chief Justice, an additional Judge and an acting Judge of the High Court.... to bring out any artificial discrimination between a Permanent Judge and an Additional Judge in the term 'Judge' as defined in Section 14 of the HCJ Act Act) would be doing violence to the definition of a 'Judge'…,' it said. 'We, therefore, have no hesitation in holding that even retired Additional HC Judges will be entitled to same basic pension that is ₹13.50 lakh per annum,' it held. On the issue of family pension and gratuity being denied to widows and family members of additional high court judges, the bench ruled it as "patently arbitrary". It also said the denial of gratuity to the widow and family members of a judge who died in harness was 'totally unsustainable' . Dealing with the issue relating to payment of provident fund and other benefits on the retirement of high court judges, it held all allowances payable to a retired judge on his retirement as a judge of the high court irrespective of the mode of entry as high court judge will have to be paid in line with the provisions of the HCJ Act. The top court reserved the judgement on January 28 in the matter.
BBC News
25-04-2025
- Health
- BBC News
Rise in racial attacks reported by Jersey health staff
The number of reported racially motivated assaults on healthcare staff has doubled in two years, the government has and Care Jersey (HCJ) said in a freedom of information request response there had been 29 racially motivated assaults reported in 2024, an increase from the 14 reported in 2022 and 15 in 2020 there had been five reported racially motivated assaults and in 2021 six, but the government said there had been fewer patients in these years due to the Covid pandemic government said the increase in reported assaults may be due to HCJ's efforts to encourage staff to report incidents and the service's anti-racism campaign in 2024. 'Data quality limitations' The HCJ's figures showed fewer physical assaults had been reported in 2024 than in the previous two 2023 there were 310 physical assaults reported by healthcare staff, up from 272 in 2022 and in 2024 the number reduced to government said inpatient mental health services accounted for 45% of the verbal abuse incidents and 72% of physical assaults in number of reported verbal assaults hit a high of 177 in 2024, up from 117 in 2023 and 99 in government said the system of collecting information had undergone changes between 2020 and 2024 and as a result, there were "data quality limitations, particularly in relation to reporting of verbal assaults." 'Working closely with police' The HCJ said police had been called to incidents in health departments 72 times in 2024, which was an increase from the 51 call-outs in 2023 but fewer than the 93 visits in 2022.A spokesperson for HCJ said it "works closely with the States of Jersey Police with regard to the prevention and management of threatening behaviours, violence and aggression towards our staff".
