Is Anne McLaughlin taking a terrible risk with the Mhangos ?

Further to previous post on the Mhangos' case.

Anne McLaughlin's blog today says this: "As things stand, the legal team are working to remove the threat of detention and deportation between now and when a decision is made as to their right to an appeal. "

What ??????????????????????????????? BUT SHE ALREADY KNOWS ABOUT THE COURT CHANGE, AND THE COURT CHANGE TOTALLY ABOLISHES SUCH THING AS NEEDING A DECISION ON A RIGHT TO APPEAL. THE MHANGOS HAVE AN AUTOMATIC RIGHT TO MAKE A COURT CHANGE FAULT-FINDING.

She also says Salmond is chasing the British government for the power to let them stay. Obviously good, but Salmond's task will be made massively easier if either himself or McLaughlin publicly announce the court change and commit themselves to its real existence.

McLaughlin is asking everyone, you, to do all you can to save the Mhangos from an atrocity. But if the atrocity happens and she did not do everything she could, how will she stand then, with all the folks she has won to this cause? She will be to blame for the atrocity if she claims to have even in theory a shred of discretionary choice over whether to automatically speak out about the court change and use it in their case. She has known about the court change for months and she has still not done it.

She needs, and the Mhangos need, you to know she can be trusted - but she can't be trusted if she plays a double game of noncommittality with you. Utterly utterly utterly utterly utterly the only way for her not to be playing a double game with you and standing ready to allow the atrocity all along, is if she IS FORCED TO automatically committally TAKE a public POSITION on the court change.

WATCH HER, WATCH HER, WATCH HER WORDS LIKE A HAWK.

Florence and Precious Mhango case

Alex Salmond has signed, with the church leaders, the letter appealing to the British government to intervene to allow Florence and precious Mhango to stay in Glasgow. These are asylum seekers whose return to Malawi will result in the child being taken away from her mother against her will. They have been the victim of a corrupt court decision that blatantly ignored most of their case's content and left it unanswered.

What they need, to cite and use against the bent court decision, is the court change. It abolishes the finality of all legal decisions, it makes them open-endedly faultable on their reasoning. It is the protection against all mediaeval bent court decisions. The political establishment have shown abundantly that they fear the court change and don't want it, for none of them have ever admitted it exists, and it has been suppressed from publicity for 11 years.

Now, how will the SNP government explain themselves to you, if censoring my submission to their consultation results in the Mhangos suffering the atrocity that all reasoning caring folks fear, and losing their fight against knowingly cruel Nazi-style racist deportation?

My submission contains a description of the court change. By defending the suppression of my submission, Salmond defends continuing to suppress the court change from public knowledge and not admitting it exists. That means, defending withholding it from the Mhangos, when knowingly it could be critical to saving them.