Report comment

Judges misuse their positions when a case involves litigants in person. They find it easy to get away with it by either depriving the litigants of a fair hearing or by imposing civil restraint orders on them. It is a shame to see all the names of litigants in person publidhed on the MOJ website. It is simple, if judges can't deal eith a LIP's case, they restrain the person to proceed and subsequently,all the senior judges follow the same, no matter whether the case has merits or involves human rights.

For instance, many judges praised me at many hearings, but they dismissed cases due to civil restraint orders. I even came across judges who pervert the course of justice by encouraging false representations to the court made by authorities. Sometimes, LIP are heard during court holidays so that chosen judges can abuse the process easily.

However, I was represented by solicitors in the past but they were intimidated and victimised by counsels representing public bodies. I reckon that those judges who campaign against certain litigants in perdon should be reprimanded and questioned as corruption and institutional racism should be abolished once brought to light.