jili ph9

Extensive confidential documents in the lead-up to the collapse of Northern Ireland’s institutions in 2002 have been made available to the public as part of annual releases from the Irish National Archives. They reveal that the Irish Government wanted to appeal to the UK side against “manipulating” every scenario for favourable election results in Northern Ireland, in an effort to protect the peace process. In the years after the landmark 1998 Good Friday Agreement, a number of outstanding issues left the political environment fraught with tension and disagreement. Mr Trimble, who won a Nobel Peace Prize with SDLP leader John Hume for their work on the Agreement, was keen to gain wins for the UUP on policing, ceasefire audits and paramilitary disarmament – but also to present his party as firmer on these matters amid swipes from its Unionist rival, the DUP. These issues were at the front of his mind as he tried to steer his party into Assembly elections planned for May 2003 and continue in his role as the Executive’s first minister despite increasing political pressure. The documents reveal the extent to which the British and Irish Governments were trying to delicately resolve the contentious negotiations, conscious that moves seen as concessions to one group could provoke anger on the other side. In June 2002, representatives of the SDLP reported to Irish officials on a recent meeting between Mr Hume’s successor Mark Durkan and Prime Minister Tony Blair on policing and security. Mr Blair is said to have suggested that the SDLP and UUP were among those who both supported and took responsibility for the Good Friday Agreement. The confidential report of the meeting says that Mr Durkan, the deputy First Minister, was not sure that Mr Trimble had been correctly categorised. The Prime Minister asked if the SDLP could work more closely with the UUP ahead of the elections. Mr Durkan argued that Mr Trimble was not only not saleable to nationalists, but also not saleable to half of the UUP – to which Mr Blair and Northern Ireland Secretary John Reid are said to have laughed in agreement. The SDLP leader further warned that pursuing a “save David” campaign would ruin all they had worked for. Damien McAteer, an adviser for the SDLP, was recorded as briefing Irish officials on September 10 that it was his view that Mr Trimble was intent on collapsing the institutions in 2003 over expected fallout for Sinn Fein in the wake of the Colombia Three trial, where men linked to the party were charged with training Farc rebels – but predicted the UUP leader would be “in the toilet” by January, when an Ulster Unionist Council (UUC) meeting was due to take place. A week later in mid September, Mr Trimble assured Irish premier Bertie Ahern that the next UUC meeting to take place in two days’ time would be “okay but not great” and insisted he was not planning to play any “big game”. It was at that meeting that he made the bombshell announcement that the UUP would pull out of the Executive if the IRA had not disbanded by January 18. The move came as a surprise to the Irish officials who, along with their UK counterparts, did not see the deadline as realistic. Sinn Fein described the resolution as a “wreckers’ charter”. Doubts were raised that there would be any progress on substantive issues as parties would not be engaged in “pre-election skirmishing”. As that could lead to a UUP walkout and the resulting suspension of the institutions, the prospect of delaying the elections was raised while bringing forward the vote was ruled out. Therefore, the two Governments stressed the need to cooperate as a stabilising force to protect the Agreement – despite not being sure how that process would survive through the January 18 deadline. The Irish officials became worried that the British side did not share their view that Mr Trimble was not “salvageable” and that the fundamental dynamic in the UUP was now Agreement scepticism, the confidential documents state. In a meeting days after the UUC announcements, Mr Reid is recorded in the documents as saying that as infuriating as it was, Mr Trimble was at that moment the “most enlightened Unionist we have”. The Secretary said he would explore what the UUP leader needed to “survive” the period between January 18 and the election, believing a significant prize could avoid him being “massacred”. Such planning went out the window just weeks later, when hundreds of PSNI officers were involved in raids of several buildings – including Sinn Fein’s offices in Stormont. The resulting “Stormontgate” spy-ring scandal accelerated the collapse of powersharing, with the UUP pulling out of the institutions – and the Secretary of State suspending the Assembly and Executive on October 14. For his part, Irish officials were briefed that Mr Reid was said to be “gung ho” about the prospect of exercising direct rule – reportedly making no mention of the Irish Government in a meeting with Mr Trimble and Mr Durkan on that day. The Northern Ireland Secretary was given a new role and Paul Murphy was appointed as his successor. A note on speaking points for a meeting with Mr Murphy in April showed that the Irish side believed the May elections should go ahead: “At a certain stage the political process has to stand on its own feet. “The Governments cannot be manipulating and finessing every scenario to engineer the right result. “We have to start treating the parties and the people as mature and trusting that they have the discernment to make the right choices.” However, the elections planned for May did not materialise, instead delayed until November. Mr Trimble would go on to lose his Westminster seat – and stewardship of the UUP – in 2005. The November election saw the DUP emerge as the largest parties – but direct rule continued as Ian Paisley’s refused to share power with Sinn Fein, which Martin McGuinness’ colleagues. The parties eventually agreed to work together following further elections in 2007. – This article is based on documents in 2024/130/5, 2024/130/6, 2024/130/15Attorneys want the US Supreme Court to say Mississippi’s felony voting ban is cruel and unusualBlack Friday Is the Best Time to Buy a PlayStation VR2Washington, on the rebound from loss to rival, takes on NJITjili ph9 。

Scanlan: Time for legislators to protect women

McGill runs for 2TDs and North Texas becomes bowl eligible by beating Temple 24-17By EMILY WAGSTER PETTUS JACKSON, Miss. (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court should overturn Mississippi’s Jim Crow-era practice of removing voting rights from people convicted of certain felonies, including nonviolent crimes such as forgery and timber theft, attorneys say in new court papers. Most of the people affected are disenfranchised for life because the state provides few options for restoring ballot access. “Mississippi’s harsh and unforgiving felony disenfranchisement scheme is a national outlier,” attorneys representing some who lost voting rights said in an appeal filed Wednesday. They wrote that states “have consistently moved away from lifetime felony disenfranchisement over the past few decades.” This case is the second in recent years — and the third since the late 19th century — that asks the Supreme Court to overturn Mississippi’s disenfranchisement for some felonies. The cases use different legal arguments, and the court rejected the most recent attempt in 2023. The new appeal asks justices to reverse a July ruling from the conservative 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said Mississippi legislators, not the courts, must decide whether to change the laws. Stripping away voting rights for some crimes is unconstitutional because it is cruel and unusual punishment, the appeal argues. A majority of justices rejected arguments over cruel and unusual punishment in June when they cleared the way for cities to enforce bans on homeless people sleeping outside in public places. Attorneys who sued Mississippi over voting rights say the authors of the state’s 1890 constitution based disenfranchisement on a list of crimes they thought Black people were more likely to commit. A majority of the appeals judges wrote that the Supreme Court in 1974 reaffirmed constitutional law allowing states to disenfranchise felons. About 38% of Mississippi residents are Black. Nearly 50,000 people were disenfranchised under the state’s felony voting ban between 1994 and 2017. More than 29,000 of them have completed their sentences, and about 58% of that group are Black, according to an expert who analyzed data for plaintiffs challenging the voting ban. Related Articles National Politics | Judge delays Trump hush money sentencing in order to decide where case should go now National Politics | Republicans scramble to fill JD Vance’s Ohio Senate seat National Politics | Gaetz’s withdrawal highlights how incoming presidents often lose Cabinet nominees National Politics | What to know about Pam Bondi, Trump’s new pick for attorney general National Politics | Democrat Bob Casey concedes to Republican David McCormick in Pennsylvania Senate contest To regain voting rights in Mississippi, a person convicted of a disenfranchising crime must receive a governor’s pardon or win permission from two-thirds of the state House and Senate. In recent years, legislators have restored voting rights for only a few people. The other recent case that went to the Supreme Court argued that authors of Mississippi’s constitution showed racist intent when they chose which felonies would cause people to lose the right to vote. In that ruling, justices declined to reconsider a 2022 appeals court decision that said Mississippi remedied the discriminatory intent of the original provisions in the state constitution by later altering the list of disenfranchising crimes. In 1950, Mississippi dropped burglary from the list. Murder and rape were added in 1968. The Mississippi attorney general issued an opinion in 2009 that expanded the list to 22 crimes, including timber larceny, carjacking, felony-level shoplifting and felony-level writing bad checks. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in a 2023 dissent that Mississippi’s list of disenfranchising crimes was “adopted for an illicit discriminatory purpose.”

Reports: Kings fire coach Mike Brown