Sentences with phrase «unlawful use of force»

The Australian Human Rights Commission condemns any unlawful use of force, and calls on the Australian and Papua New Guinea Governments to protect the human rights of the men on Manus Island.The Commission urges the Australian Government to ensure...

We have handled numerous unlawful use of force cases against different law enforcement agencies in New Mexico.

Like police pursuit cases, unlawful use of force cases involve determining the standard operating procedures (SOP's) of a particular law enforcement agency; determining whether such procedures are in compliance with national standards; and determining whether such procedures were violated.

Free Terrorism Term Paper: Terrorist's Attack «The unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives» - FBI Free Terrorism Term Paper: Global War on Terrorism Before you start writing free terrorism term paper, you should determine the meaning of the term.

This represents an unlawful use of force by the Russian State against the United Kingdom.

the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives

Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as «the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives» (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).

She [Theresa May] said the UK would then consider their response before deciding what action to take, but added: «Should there be no credible response, we will conclude that this action amounts to an unlawful use of force by the Russian state against the United Kingdom.»

She said Russia has until the end of today to explain itself, otherwise the U.K. will have to conclude that there was an «unlawful use of force» by the country.

Not exact matches

The Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, which scrutinises government institutions, accused police of using «unlawful and unacceptable» levels of force.

While some have argued that a limited use of force to discourage future chemical weapons use can be legal, most scholars regard the strikes as unlawful.

Use of force will be a central part of the regime, even though the court of appeal found it to be unlawful in 2008.

One of the counts reads: «That you Air Chief Marshal Alex S Badeh (whilst being the Chief of Air Staff, Nigerian Air Force) and IYALIKAM NIGERIA LIMITED between 28th March and 5th December, 2013 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Court, did use an aggregate sum of N878, 362,732.94 (Eight Hundred and Seventy - Eight Million, Three Hundred and Sixty Two Thousand, Seven Hundred and Thirty - Two Naira, Ninety - Four kobo) removed from the accounts of the Nigerian Air Force and paid into the account of Rytebuilders Technologies Limited with Zenith Bank Plc for the construction of a shopping mall situate at Plot 1386, Oda Crescent Cadastral Zone A07, Wuse II, Abuja for yourself, when you reasonably ought to have known that the said funds formed part of the proceed of unlawful activity (to wit: criminal breach of trust and corruption) of Air Chief Marshal Alex S Badeh and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 15 (2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended) and punishable under Section 15 (3) of the same Act»

If any provision of these General Terms of Use is adjudged unlawful or void or unenforceable in whole or in part, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect.

So I was dismayed and disappointed when I discovered its publisher (Viking, a part of Penguin Group) has used the potentially unlawful agency model of eBook pricing to force Amazon to sell the Kindle version of the book for $ 9 more than what it charges for the hardback version.

If any provision of this Terms of Use is adjudged unlawful or void or unenforceable in whole or in part, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect.

A person who uses defensive force shall be presumed to have reasonably feared imminent death or great bodily harm, or the commission of a felony upon him or another or upon his dwelling, or against a vehicle which he was occupying... if the person against whom the defensive force was used, was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, occupied vehicle... and the person who used defensive force knew or had reason to believe that the forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

Most recently, the state of Indiana has taken the castle doctrine even one step further, becoming the first state to specifically permit its residents to use deadly force in response to the «unlawful intrusion by another individual or a public servant.»

Kindaka Sanders, A Reason to Resist: The Use of Deadly Force in Aiding Victims of Unlawful Police Aggression, 52 San Diego L. Rev. 695, 732 - 35 (2015)(footnotes omitted).

Although «assault» is an independent crime and is to be treated as such, for practical purposes today «assault» is generally synonymous with the term «battery» and is a term used to mean the actual intended use of unlawful force to another person without his consent.

(1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, a person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for that purpose.

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, a person is not justified in using physical force if: (a) With intent to cause bodily injury or death to another person, he provokes the use of unlawful physical force by that other person; or (b) He is the initial aggressor; except that his use of physical force upon another person under the circumstances is justifiable if he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person his intent to do so, but the latter nevertheless continues or threatens the use of unlawful physical force; or (c) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law.

Paul is most vulnerable in this scenario on the question of whether he reasonably believed that the degree of force he used was reasonably necessary for the purpose of defending Emily and himself from Thug's unlawful use of physical force, or whether he went further than what was reasonably necessary for a few minutes that left Thug «incapacitated and thoroughly bloodied».

Section 35 -41-3-2 provides, in essence, that an intervener may come to the aid of the perceived victim of unlawful police aggression and may, under certain circumstances, use deadly force to protect a third party, even a stranger, from excessive police force...

He subsequently made a complaint under the Police Services Act, alleging unlawful or unnecessary arrest and use of unnecessary force, and also initiated a civil action for damages.

There is no question there is a threat of violence, there is no question it is unlawful, it would be legal if it could be demonstrated the threat was immediate or that a reasonable person would believe it was and the force you used was reasonable also - using force to disarm and restrain the perpetrator is reasonable; continuing to use force after that is not.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

Accordingly, there was said to be a tension between requiring a verdict of unlawful killing to be proved to the criminal standard, and the requirement of the Convention that it was for «the authorities to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation» for the use of force in the circumstances.

Of course, I do believe that it's settled law that a Canadian company can not commit unlawful discrimination and use the fact that it was forced on them by a 3rd party as defence.

The basic question is whether a person has the right to use force to defend against an unlawful battery: «a person is privileged to use such force as reasonably appears necessary to defend him or herself against an apparent threat of unlawful and immediate violence from another».

Landlords may not take the law into their own hands and evict a tenant by use of force or unlawful means.