Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Gold
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    7,150
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Arrest warrant against Director of Migracion

    A judge from DN issued an arrest warrant for contempt of court against the Director of DGM (Migracion).
    http://www.diariolibre.com/noticias/...cion-XB2047202

    The judge ordered a Cuban set for deportation be presented to the court, in order to hear the Habeas Corpus filed by the Cuban. The DGM failed to produce the Cuban at the specified date to the court. An arrest warrant against the DGM director for contempt of court followed soon thereafter.

    Remember the case fo Cascatti? Looks like DGM does not like to respect court orders, we all know they failed to obey two separate judgements (one from civil court, one from criminal) which voided the deportation order. Ins pite of those two judgements, DGM failed to allow Cascatti to return to the DR.

    This is a similar case, where DGM failed to produce a person in the deportation process to the court, to hear his Habeas Corpus.

  2. #2
    Silver
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    3,888
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    ha dom politics the dgm will file suit and all forgiven

  3. #3
    Bronze
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,570
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Surely the court order does not literally mean the Major General, the Director of Migracion but the correct officer in the department. In cases in the British Commonwealth where there is an action against the crown , normally shown as R v another person, the court does not proceed against the Queen herself .
    This is the correct way of proceeding with habeas corpus and the authority detaining the person must present the person in front of the court for the judge to decide . Interestingly , this is a wonderful application of english common law but is decided without a jury .
    Out of curiosity where are the immigration holding facilities or do they use the normal prison facilities ??

  4. #4
    Platinum
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    31,592
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    i love the smell of upcoming elections in the air...

  5. Likes Meemselle liked this post
  6. #5
    Silver
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    4,198
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kipling333 View Post
    Surely the court order does not literally mean the Major General, the Director of Migracion but the correct officer in the department. In cases in the British Commonwealth where there is an action against the crown , normally shown as R v another person, the court does not proceed against the Queen herself .
    This is the correct way of proceeding with habeas corpus and the authority detaining the person must present the person in front of the court for the judge to decide . Interestingly , this is a wonderful application of english common law but is decided without a jury .
    Out of curiosity where are the immigration holding facilities or do they use the normal prison facilities ??
    When in contempt of court it would be the person making the decision, to not produce the person or to not obey the court order. So it should be the Dir. of Immigration because he is in charge of this department.

    The Queen (I am assuming you were talking about the Queen of England) makes no decisions, she is not in charge of any government department nor is she really in charge of the government, the Prime Minister is. The Queen is only a figure head.

  7. #6
    Gold
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    7,150
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    It's actually not the first warrant against him, one was issued about 2 weeks ago, for a similar matter - contempt of court for failing to present 3 Syrians for Habeas Corpus hearing.

    http://noticiastelemicro.com/emiten-...adanos-sirios/

  8. #7
    Bronze
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,570
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Thank you Derfish .I did not want to proceed with that line myself .. but in fact Derfish has proved my point in that the arrest warrents against the Major General are just the formalities and he in fact never is arrested .. No one seems to know where this Cuban is being held .
    Some weeks ago we had a number of people commenting that someone who kept silent was guilty and now we have this habeas corpus case. Interesting because habeas corpus and the right to remain silent have been gradually wittled down by statute. Now anyone can be banged up for weeks in some countries and months in others without having to be charged . The recent cases in Guantanamo where people have been locked away for years without being charged are examples .

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •