Democracy is a farce if cheating in an election is permitted regardless of how late the wrong doing is discovered and whether or not police action is possible. Political parties that gain office through electoral fraud should not be allowed to continue with impunity, they must demonstrate that they have legitimate support of the electorate.

Because justice needs to be done both these men are totally innocent and have been wrongly convicted of murder.

To the French Ambassador; Mme Sylvie Bermann, We are writing to you to express a deep concern about the treatment of refugees and migrants on the French-UK border. On the 31st January, nearly a month after the ‘exclusion zone’ was announced in the Calais refugee camp - a church and mosque were demolished by the French authorities. This is contrary to a promise made publicly by the Prefect of Calais that these would be protected. Armed CRS police stood by as the demolition took place. The exclusion zone – until recently home to 2000 people - has become the scene of regular unprovoked tear gas attacks from the police, who also continue to shoot refugees with rubber bullets and water canons, randomly beat people walking in the streets, and are complicit with aggression from far-right activists. While we recognise that the UK government must bear equal responsibility for the existence of these camps, we, as residents of the UK, with or without papers, call on you, the French Ambassador, to put pressure on the French government to cease sanctioning such pitiless and violent behaviour, which demonstrates complete disregard for human dignity. The refugees come here for safety and are greeted by razor wire and armed police. Two nations who pride themselves on their democracy, fairness and justice should not be committing this appalling violence against people who are fleeing war, terrorism, poverty, drought and persecution. Both governments must now recognise that this is a global and long-term issue and act accordingly, not with hostility and border controls, but with compassion. This situation is not going away: the long-term issues of the current ‘refugee crisis’ will continue to escalate due, not only to intensifying conflicts, but also climate change. Thus it is essential that we find a kinder, more rational and human response to the situation. We are asking you, as the French Ambassador, to take a stand against the violent response of both the French and British authorities, and represent to them the shame we feel at both our nations’ behaviour. We are here in solidarity with the refugees and migrants trapped on the border with the UK, those already here and those to come, whose voices and stories are not being heard and whose basic humanity is being ignored.

We, the undersigned, care deeply about the arts, and equally the natural environment and the rights of humans around the world. We believe arts and cultural institutions should break their ties with oil companies such as BP, a company which has caused repeated environmental catastrophes, including the Deepwater Horizon spill, and been implicated in numerous human rights violations. Furthermore, BP is turning a profit on the continued extraction of dirty fossil fuels, pushing us towards runaway climate change, whilst lobbying against environmental laws and clean energy alternatives [1, 2]. By accepting sponsorship from BP, cultural institutions give the oil giant much-needed positive publicity, and help it to obscure the destructive reality of its activities with a veneer of respectability. At the same time, oil sponsorship taints the reputation of the institutions that accept it. We recognise the vital importance of arts funding, particularly after public funding cuts. However BP sponsorship provides less than 1% of the annual income of the British Museum, Tate, and Royal Opera House, and just 3% of the income of the National Portrait Gallery [3], yet BP are allowed to place their name and logo alongside the names of these institutions, on their website and in exhibitions (despite many artists and arts workers having strong views against such branding) [4, 5]. BP needs these institutions far more than they need BP. This is the 26th year that BP has sponsored the Portrait Awards, through an agreement with the National Portait Gallery (NPG) in London. Fortunately this agreement is due to end this year. The NPG could choose not to renew the agreement, and to find a more appropriate sponsor for the Portrait Awards. However, negotiations about renewal are already underway. The NPG will not drop BP as a sponsor without strong pressure from the public and the arts sector. We need to act now. Over its 26 years of sponsorship, BP has repeatedly caused great harms to the environment and people; it has been responsible for multiple deadly explosions and oil spillages, including that of Deepwater Horizon, which killed 11 people, decimated ecosystems and livelihoods in the Gulf of Mexico, and resulted in the largest corporate fine in history [6]. It has traded with oppressive regimes from Azerbaijan to Libya, and has even been implicated in torture in Colombia [7]. It has recently expanded into tar sands, an extreme form of energy production which contaminates water and tramples on indigenous rights [8]. Worldwide, fossil fuel companies have currently laid claim to five times the volume of oil, gas and coal that humanity can burn without causing dangerous and destructive levels of global warming [9] - despite this, BP has stated that it will continue to explore and exploit new reserves of oil and gas into the future. In 1989, the National Portrait Gallery ended its eight-year Portrait Award sponsorship agreement with tobacco company John Player [10]. It is time for this national cultural institution to show such moral leadership and forward-thinking once again, by cutting ties with BP. As a partner of the National Portrait Gallery, the Scottish National Portrait Gallery can influence this decision. We call on this respected national cultural institution to put pressure on the NPG to find a more appropriate sponsor, and to refuse to host the BP Portrait Awards until a new sponsor has been found. For more information, please see: http://bp-or-not-bp.org/ http://bp-or-not-bp.org/scotland http://platformlondon.org/p-publications/picturethis/ References 1. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/may/02/bp-deepwater-horizon-oil-spills 2. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/21/bp-tops-the-list-of-firms-obstructing-climate-action-in-europe 3. http://platformlondon.org/p-publications/artoilinfographic/ 4. http://fossilfundsfree.org/who/ 5. http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/jun/24/no-oil-painting-bp-sponsorship-npg-portrait-award 6. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/02/bp-will-pay-largest-environmental-fine-in-us-history-for-gulf-oil-spill 7. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/22/gilberto-torres-survived-colombias-death-squads-now-he-wants-justice 8. http://environmentaldefence.ca/reports/canadas-toxic-tar-sands-most-destructive-project-earth 9. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719 10. http://platformlondon.org/p-publications/picturethis/ 11. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-risks-as-conclusive-as-link-between-smoking-and-lung-cancer/

As he spreads his hateful speech and guides people on how to exploit, manipulate and rape women, he's putting the welfare of women at risk. He needs to be stopped by all genders, within our communities. Having written a number of jaw-droppingly offensive blog posts and published books, Roosh V believes that men should stop asking for permission, and that alpha males should slowly break down the confidence in women to get what they want. He is a hugely dangerous individual. His fans have extensive forums online, detailing where to 'pick up the easiest girls' in each city, naming bars, venues and strategies. Roosh V needs to be stopped. Please sign.

The signatories of this petition regard peaceful, direct action as a political right & believe that poeple are entitled to non-violent political protest, as inferred by rights under Article 19 & Article 20 [1] of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Article 20 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

Increasing numbers of homeless people are being arrested for begging around the country. In 2013-14, 2771 cases were brought before the courts, a 70% increase on the previous year. Police use an archaic law which deems those found begging to be 'idle and disorderly'. Begging was made a recordable offence in 2003 against the strong criticisms of civil rights groups and homelessness organisations. Those prosecuted can be fined up to £1000 excluding court charges when found with just a few pennies. Those who have 'gathered alms' (that is, accepted money, food or other material goods offered to them) can be prosecuted under this same law with the same consequences. Some people are kept in cells for several nights. Although begging in and of itself is not an imprisonable offence, if the person is already on bail for another case a simple arrest for begging can lead to imprisonment. Those who are fined will inevitably have to beg more to pay off these fines, risking further arrests and fines, a punishment which stands out in its absurdity. Punishing the destitute for trying to survive is both costly and morally abhorrent. It is a waste of tax payers' money which is spent paying police who 'catch people out' in organised undercover operations, as well as on court cases to prosecute them. The minimum cost of bringing one case to the Magistrates' Court is £1000, meaning that in the year 2013-14, bringing begging cases before the courts cost the taxpayer at least £2.777 million. This is money that could be spent helping people rather than punishing them. Police also routinely move homeless people on under part 3 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014) which gives police the power to confiscate property and exclude individuals from a particular area for up to 48 hours, with the officer also able to impose by what manner and route the person must leave. Failure to comply is a criminal offence which can result in a £2500 fine or 3 months in prison. Refusing to surrender your property is punishable by a fine of up to £500. The two conditions needed by officers to issue a dispersal order are firstly, that the constable has 'reasonable grounds to suspect that the behaviour of the person in the locality has contributed or is likely to contribute to (a) members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed, or (b) the occurrence in the locality of crime or disorder, and secondly, that the constable considers that giving a direction to the person is necessary for the purpose of removing or reducing the likelihood of (a) or (b)'. Given that begging is a crime considered 'idle and disorderly', the two laws in tandem essentially give police de facto power to exclude any homeless person from any area simply because they think it is likely that the person, being homeless, might beg there. The highly subjective definition of 'anti-social behaviour' as that which contributes or is likely to contribute to members of the public in the locality being harassed, alarmed or distressed reinforces this and even with the decriminalisation of begging, would still give police the power to move on any homeless person from any area simply because they believe doing so is necessary for the purpose of removing or reducing the likelihood of members of the public being distressed by seeing them. Seeing people forced to live on the streets is distressing to much of the public for good reason, but this compassionate distress means that under this definition a homeless person is considered to be exhibiting anti-social behaviour simply by existing visibly. The anti-social behaviour that causes the public distress is not caused by the homeless person however, but by the authorities' failure to provide people with shelter in a country that has 600,000 empty homes. As described by someone living on the street, being asked to move on when you have nowhere to go is like being asked to walk into a brick wall. These laws and their enforcement victimize vulnerable people who are already suffering the daily struggle of life on the streets or in insecure and unstable temporary accommodation. We believe that kicking someone for limping when it is you who cut off their leg is shameless and cruel. We believe that the government should be providing homes for the homeless, not handcuffs. We therefore call on parliament to repeal without replacement section 3 of the Vagrancy Act (1824), to amend part 3 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014) to safeguard homeless people from its discriminatory use, and for an ultimate end to the criminalisation of homelessness by any and all other laws that may be newly concocted or dug up for this purpose. If you have an MP who may be sympathetic, get in touch with them to push this issue to parliament. We launched this petition at our demo at Brighton Magistrate's court on the 20th January.

Government have announced the closure of 86 courts and tribunals in England and Wales. If this closure programme goes ahead 38.5% of courts and tribunals will have closed since 2010. These closures will restrict access to courts and tribunals for many court users and will add unnecessary stress for victims and witnesses. The plans that were subject to consultation over the summer contained a series of errors including underestimates of journey times to alternative courts and a lack of detailed cost benefit analysis with many of the proposed closures making no financial sense. Many courts set for closure have better facilities for court users than the ones they are being proposed to be moved to. The Government case for the closures is driven solely by cost and is underpinned by digital processes in the early stages of implementation with the usual associated problems. This decision leaves a justice system in real danger of becoming so divorced from the people who need access to it that it can no longer be considered to be true justice and will undermine public confidence.

At the moment the justice system is skewed in favour of the wealthiest citizens. The poorest are effectively priced out of it. Legal aid is designed to aid those on low income but it is widely abused by the legal profession for its own ends. The ends of justice are not served by a system that leaves the granting of legal aid in the hands of the legal profession. The Scottish government trumpets justice but it needs to demonstrate that commitment by ensuring that everyone has equal access to the services of solicitors and the Courts of law. The present system is flawed, costly, and overdue for reform and reconstruction.

No parent should have to hold their children and comfort them as they die, or be told that their child has been harmed by someone who is supposed to love them. But that’s exactly what I had to experience 10 years ago when my sons Jack and Paul were killed by their father after a family court judge granted him unsupervised contact with them, despite my warnings. For the past nine years, I’ve been campaigning with Women’s Aid to ensure children are at the heart of every decision made in the family courts and their voices, wishes and feelings are heard. I’ve been to Downing Street and the Houses of Parliament to help get key changes through in the Domestic Abuse Act.  In 2017, we saw new guidance published for judges making decisions about child contact in cases of domestic abuse. And in 2020, the Government committed to make the family courts safer for adult and child survivors. But years later, we’re still waiting for true reform to keep children safe now and for generations to come.  That’s why I’m calling on the new Labour Government and family courts to ensure, once and for all, that decisions made about parental contact do not allow known abusers to have unsafe contact with children that puts their lives at risk.

We The TAXPAYERS Need to Change UK Banking Culture and STOP Product Mis-selling, Dodgy Loans, LIBOR Rigging and Huge Bonuses. Jail Crooked ‘Fat Cat’ Bankers Don’t Reward Them! The Government’s Financial Conduct Authority has dropped a major investigation into bank pay, promotion, bonuses and other incentives. Osborne said he knew nothing about this - so SIGN this petition to ask him to reverse this decision! USA & Iceland jail crooked Bankers Vietnam shoots crooked Bankers The UK rewards crooked and inept Bankers! UK banks brought our country to it’s knees with a £1.3 TRILLION debt, and we, the taxpayer, bailed them out. It’s time for a change. We need to make banking accountable, responsible, fair and honest, AND, once more, COMPETITIVE. Dodgy and irresponsible bank lending and too much bank leverage led to the 2008 financial crash! How many times does the taxpayer/uk population have to be kicked? Had the Bankers not brought the country to its knees in 2008 what state would the NHS and other public services be in right now? - Better funded for sure. How deep would the cut's need to be, had it not been for the 10's of billions to keep Banks afloat due to fat cat greed and arrogance. The Bankers have stolen your money, robbed your pensions, over-stated their profits, manipulated their share prices and raised new capital under false pretences: Accusations any normal businessman would have been sent to prison for. From 2001 to 2013 - 100,000 small UK businesses were mis-sold hundreds of billions of dodgy loans by Clydesdale/Yorkshire Bank, RBS, Barclays Lloyds & HSBC related to a rigged/ non-existent Libor rate! These mis-sold loans loaded with massive hidden charges have destroyed many thousands of these businesses, and continue to do so. Some of the banks have washed their hands by offloading these loans to American vulture funds to break up these businesses. PPI Mis-selling affected many millions of us, but still the banks get away with it with new scandals continually surfacing. Banks were being brought to book for PPI, but the Government has now decided to water down/cancel it’s own investigation into banking culture. Sign this petition which asks George Osborne to restart the Financial Conduct Authority investigation into banking culture.

Children and young people in custody are effectively being cared for by the state. They are among the most vulnerable and disadvantaged in the country. Their treatment by private contactors such as G4S has been, and continues to be, disgraceful. The latest allegations about Medway STC, backed by video evidence, are just the latest in a sorry line of serious incidents. Children have died in custody at the hands of staff members and many more have taken their own lives after ill treatment. It is nothing short of a national scandal that despite this, contracts continue to be awarded to G4S, who have such a poor record of providing public services. Does money matter more than children’s lives to the government?