Sky Documentary - Searching For Madeleine

[Mr Gray]

You are arguing about something which hasn't, as yet, been applied for. If it is applied for it will take years to decide if, of course, the application is accepted. You may think it will be accepted and the judgement will be in the McCann's favour. Pure speculation coloured by your biased opinion. At this moment in time the McCanns have lost their case to silence Amaral.

I'm not arguing I'm stating a fact
The SC is not the final arbiter of the law in this case and may have made an incorrect decision
Until the ECHR make a decision you cannot claim that the SC have applied the law correctly

[Robittybob1]

I'm not arguing I'm stating a fact
The SC is not the final arbiter of the law in this case and may have made an incorrect decision
Until the ECHR make a decision you cannot claim that the SC have applied the law correctly

There seems to be some logic there.

[Robittybob1]

Thread
"What is the evidence in the Madeleine McCann disappearance?"
Post 5

I realised today that if Madeleine woke and wandered for whatever reason, she would have left via the sliding door and the two gates on the path.  So it is therefore evident that the abductor went back there and closed the door and the gates probably so the other two kids didn't also wander off.

That indicates to me (IMO) it was someone who knew the family.

[Alice Purjorick]

No I don't
Portuguese law is governed by Europe and is subject  to European law
The ECHR will decide if the SC has complied with the law
The judgement claims it has complied but the ECHR may decide otherwise
As regard human rights the ECHR is the arbiter of the law in portugal and thank god for that

1. Administered by whom? I think you will find however that the ECJ does not administer national law.
2. Which law?

[Alice Purjorick]

I'm not arguing I'm stating a fact
The SC is not the final arbiter of the law in this case and may have made an incorrect decision
Until the ECHR make a decision you cannot claim that the SC have applied the law correctly

The SC is the final arbiter of national law in the Republic of Portugal.
Whatever the ECHR do they cannot overturn the ruling of the SC.
With respect to what the ECHR can do see Jassi's post a bit above.

[faithlilly]

So running out of money on that score wouldn't matter.

If they run out of money who would pay the retainer?

[Eleanor]

If they run out of money who would pay the retainer?

How much is The Retainer?  And how often do The McCanns have to pay it?

[Mr Gray]

The SC is the final arbiter of national law in the Republic of Portugal.
Whatever the ECHR do they cannot overturn the ruling of the SC.
With respect to what the ECHR can do see Jassi's post a bit above.

Once again
Portugal is not the final arbiter of the law in Portugal in cases regarding human rights
The ECHR is
The SC argued that their judgement complies with eoropean law
The ECHR may not agree
They cannot  overturn the decision but they can rule that the SC abused the mccanns human rights and award  compensation
Those  are the facts

[Alfie]

I thought the two documentaries were more balanced than previous reports. Evidence was quoted and there was less emphasis on how the parents feel.

But according to you the MSM is under constant threat of legal action by the McCanns intimidating them into not reporting the facts.  So what are the facts that the MSM aren't reporting?

[Alice Purjorick]

Once again
Portugal is not the final arbiter of the law in Portugal in cases regarding human rights
The ECHR is
The SC argued that their judgement complies with eoropean law
The ECHR may not agree
They cannot  overturn the decision but they can rule that the SC abused the mccanns human rights and award  compensation
Those  are the facts

You posted:
Portuguese law is governed by Europe and is subject  to European law.

Maybe you had better define what you mean by European law and Portuguese law.

Portugal could of course ignore any ruling by the ECHR as it would seem many other states do:

Several states ignore judgments of the Strasbourg Court
36 of the 47 Council of Europe member states are not fulfilling one of their central duty: they fail to fully implement within a reasonable time judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasburg.
http://www.humanrights.ch/en/standards/international/council-of-europe-institutions/states-ignore-judgments-strasbourg-court

[Mr Gray]

You posted:
Portuguese law is governed by Europe and is subject  to European law.

Maybe you had better define what you mean by European law and Portuguese law.

Portugal could of course ignore any ruling by the ECHR as it would seem many other states do:

Several states ignore judgments of the Strasbourg Court
36 of the 47 Council of Europe member states are not fulfilling one of their central duty: they fail to fully implement within a reasonable time judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasburg.
http://www.humanrights.ch/en/standards/international/council-of-europe-institutions/states-ignore-judgments-strasbourg-court

I would have thought you understood such basics
Of course Portugal could ignore the ECHR as they have ignored the rule of law imo
If they want to be known as a country who abused the human rights of the McCanns that's up to them but it would portugal in a very bad  light
Not that they would care

[stephen25000]

Can someone remind me of the human rights of Madeleine which weren't defended ?

[Alice Purjorick]

I would have thought you understood such basics
Of course Portugal could ignore the ECHR as they have ignored the rule of law imo
If they want to be known as a country who abused the human rights of the McCanns that's up to them but it would portugal in a very bad  light
Not that they would care

I do;
The Supreme Court of The Republic of Portugal is the highest court in that state, there being no mechanisms for overturning it's rulings.
It cannot be overruled by the ECJ as that it is outside the scope of the ECJ which rules on European Union matters not matters of national law.
It cannot be overruled by the ECHR as that is outside the remit of the ECHR.
If a plaintiff makes a complaint against a member state of The Council of Europe it may, if admissible, eventually be heard by the ECHR who may fine the member state and ask them to change their laws if deemed desirable by the ECHR. The fine may be paid to plaintiff as compensation. Just as guide to quantum Steel and Morris were only awarded £50k by the ECHR against the UK in the McLibel Trial.
Then of course the state may just ignore the ruling as over 75% of states do.
So as it sits at present:
The ruling of the SC remains and will so in perpetuity.
The Drs McCann will have to pay the costs awarded by the courts plus their own legal costs unless someother arrangement satisfactory to all parties be agreed.
Appealing to the ECHR is a long winded process whereby one may, apparently, finish up with an unenforceable piece of paper.

[Brietta]

Can someone remind me of the human rights of Madeleine which weren't defended ?

                           The presumption of her death without a shred of evidence to support it .

[stephen25000]

                           The presumption of her death without a shred of evidence to support it .

The fact that no trace of her has been found is evidence that she no longer lives.

Remember the standard 7 year ruling in courts.

The fact that she and her siblings were left by themselves, means they were not being taken care of. Left in a situation where they were exposed to danger. A breach of their human rights.