Homeless groups say not enough done to address housing crisis

first_img LOCAL homeless organisations the Mid West Simon Community and Novas Initiatives say that Budget 2016 does not go far enough to address the current homeless crisis.While both groups welcomed the increase in funding for homeless services, they are disappointed at the omission of rent control measures from Tuesday’s budget.Sign up for the weekly Limerick Post newsletter Sign Up Jackie Bonfield, general nanager of the Mid West Simon Community said: “We are deeply disappointed that there will not be an announcement of introduction of rent certainty measures today. These measures are essential in light of rapidly increasing market rents to offer tenants greater security of tenure.“That these proposals have been blocked at a time when there is such limited social housing supply is appalling. Without such measures people will continue to find rents unaffordable and will continue to be pushed over the edge into homelessness. Rent certainty would provide the tenant and the landlord with certainty and security with tenancies.”Ms Bonfield was also critical of the government’s failure to increase rent supplement rates.“Our Locked Out report (August 2015) showed that 92 per cent of properties on the market are outside of the reach of people on state rent support. If people cannot afford growing markets rents with the limited state support provided we will continue to see people becoming homelessness and people prevented from leaving homelessness behind. It is almost impossible to find accommodation that falls within the supplement limits.”She also revealed that in the Mid West region this week, there were only nine available properties within the rent supplement limit – one in Clare, four in Limerick and four in Tipperary.A spokesperson for Novas Initiatives welcomed the government’s commitment of €17 million to emergency accommodation and to the social housing construction programme.However they added that it “does little to stem the tide of homelessness right now”.“Without an increase in rent caps and without rent certainty families will continue to be forced into homelessness with little hope of securing family accommodation in the short-term,” added that spokesperson.Referring to the news that NAMA is to provide more than 20,000 new houses over the next five year, Ms Bonfield said: “We have continuously expressed concern in relation to social housing provision that there is just too little happening at far too slow a pace. We cannot tell the men, women and children using our services, trapped in emergency accommodation and people sleeping on our streets at night to wait two years before they will have a home of their own. Local Authorities need to get back into the core business of building and delivering social housing to those who need it most.” Limerick’s National Camogie League double header to be streamed live TAGSBudget 2016homelessnesslimerickMid West Simon CommunityNovas Initiatives WATCH: “Everyone is fighting so hard to get on” – Pat Ryan on competitive camogie squads Limerick Ladies National Football League opener to be streamed live Twitter Facebook RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Previous articleThe Specks from Glasses IslandNext articleThe world looks different from above John Keoghhttp://www.limerickpost.ie Linkedincenter_img Print WhatsApp Email Predictions on the future of learning discussed at Limerick Lifelong Learning Festival Limerick Artist ‘Willzee’ releases new Music Video – “A Dream of Peace” NewsHomeless groups say not enough done to address housing crisisBy John Keogh – October 15, 2015 612 Advertisement Vanishing Ireland podcast documenting interviews with people over 70’s, looking for volunteers to share their stories last_img read more

Lewd, Filthy, Indecent Questions To Prosecutrix In Sexual Assault Cases To Not Be Allowed By Trial Courts: P & H HC Directs Courts [Read Judgment]

first_imgNews UpdatesLewd, Filthy, Indecent Questions To Prosecutrix In Sexual Assault Cases To Not Be Allowed By Trial Courts: P & H HC Directs Courts [Read Judgment] Mehal Jain21 Aug 2020 1:19 AMShare This – xThe Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday required its Registrar General to circulate to all the Presiding Officers/Designated Courts dealing with cases of Crime against Women, in the States of Punjab, Haryana and the U.T., Chandigarh, its observations against “a lewd, filthy and an indecent question put to the prosecutrix” in a rape case, which, the court said, could not have been allowed…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday required its Registrar General to circulate to all the Presiding Officers/Designated Courts dealing with cases of Crime against Women, in the States of Punjab, Haryana and the U.T., Chandigarh, its observations against “a lewd, filthy and an indecent question put to the prosecutrix” in a rape case, which, the court said, could not have been allowed by the trial Court. Justice Arwind Singh Sangwan added that such conduct is in violation of the directions given by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab vs Gurmit Singh (1996), where the top court stipulated that while conducting the cross-examination of victims of sexual assault, the Court should be vigilant that defence counsel should not adopt a strategy of continuing questioning the prosecutrix as to the detail of the rape and the Court should not sit as a silent spectator while the victim of the crime is being cross-examined by the defence and it should effectively control the recording of the evidence to avoid her victimisation. The Single Judge was hearing a set of appeals emerging out of the same judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court in a rape case. The Single Bench pointed out that while conducting cross examination on behalf of the accused, their counsel had put certain questions which, “in opinion of this Court”, could not be asked to a rape victim to prove the innocence of the accused. “One of the questions and its reply reads as under:- ‘Ques. Whether accused Ashraf Mir had sexual intercourse with you in his full satisfaction or not and whether the act of sexual intercourse was complete? Ans. I removed my clothes and whatever a man does with a woman while committing sexual intercourse was completely done by accused Mohd. Ashraf Mir with me'”, extracted Justice Sangwan in his judgment. The Single Bench proceeded to state that “the trial Court should not have allowed such questions to be put to the prosecutrix if the defense counsel could not shatter the testimony of a rape victim”. The High Court observed that the defence was set up so strongly that in the cross examination of the prosecutrix, certain questions were put to her to the extent “Whether while having sexual intercourse with Mohd. Ashraf Mir (A-5), she (PW-1) was able to satisfy him”, which she replied. “One more question was put to her ‘Out of 02 persons, i.e. Mohd. Ashraf Mir (A-5) and one (C-20), who performed sexual intercourse first’. Again, PW-1 (W-1) replied that Mohd. Ashraf Mir (A-5) had sex first”, Justice Sangwan noted. The bench expressed its shock that “Even, a perusal of the subsequent part of the cross examination of the prosecutrix shows that the defence counsel tried to impeach the character of the victim by asking various questions regarding her character to suggest that she had consensual sex with many other persons as she was into flesh trade”. In his judgment, the Single judge quoted the operative part of the judgment in State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh , which reads as under:- “There has been lately, lot of criticism of the treatment of the victims of sexual assault in the court during their cross-examination. The provisions of Evidence Act regarding relevancy of facts notwithstanding, some defense counsel adopt the strategy of continual questioning of the prosecutrix as to the details of the rape. The victim is required to repeat again and again the details of the rape incident not so much as to bring out the facts on record or to test her credibility but to test her story for inconsistencies with a view to attempt to twist the interpretation of events given by her so as to make them appear inconsistent with her allegations. The Court, therefore, should not sit as a silent spectator while the victim of crime is being cross-examined by the defense. It must effectively control the recording of evidence in the Court. While every latitude should be given to the accused to test the veracity of the prosecutrix and the credibility of her version through cross-examination, the court must also ensure that cross-examination is not made a means of harassment or causing humiliation to the victim of crime. A victim of rape, it must be remembered, has already undergone a traumatic experience and if she is made to repeat again and again, in unfamiliar surroundings, what she had been subjected to, she may be too ashamed and even nervous or confused to speak and her silence or a confused stray sentence may be wrongly interpreted as “discrepancies and contradictions” in her evidence”.Click Here To Download Judgment[Read Judgment]Subscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Storylast_img read more