| ISLE OF MAN Isle of Man Isle of Man (British Crown Dependency) Joined United Nations: 24 October 1945 Human Rights as assured by their constitution Click here Updated 07/30/10 |
| CAPITAL |
| POPULATION |
| CHIEF OF STATE |
| SELECTION PROCESS |
Douglas
76,913 (July 2010 est.)
Elizabeth II of United Kingdom
Lord of Man since 6 February 1952
Lord of Man since 6 February 1952
The Monarch is hereditary; Lieutenant Governor appointed by
the monarch for a five-year term;
Next scheduled election: None
the monarch for a five-year term;
Next scheduled election: None
HEAD OF GOVERNMENT
SELECTION PROCESS
Tony Brown
Chief Minister since 14 December 2006
Chief Minister since 14 December 2006
The Chief Minister is elected by the Tynwald; election last held
14 December 2006. House of Keys speaker elected Chief
Minister by the Tynwald. Election last held 14 December 2006
Next scheduled election: December 2011
14 December 2006. House of Keys speaker elected Chief
Minister by the Tynwald. Election last held 14 December 2006
Next scheduled election: December 2011
| DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS |
| ETHNIC GROUPS |
Manx (Norse-Celtic descent), Britons
| RELIGIONS |
Anglican, Roman Catholic, Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, Society of Friends
| GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE |
British Crown Dependency; Parliamentary Democracy; no first-order administrative divisions as defined by the US
Government, but there are 24 local authorities each with its own elections. Legal system is English common law and Manx
statute
Executive: Monarch represented by Lieutenant Governor; The Chief Minister is elected by the Tynwald for a five-year
term; election last held 14 December 2006 (next to be held in December 2011)
Legislative: Bicameral Tynwald consists of the Legislative Council (an 11-member body composed of the President
of Tynwald, the Lord Bishop of Sodor and Man, a nonvoting attorney general, and eight others named by the House of
Keys) and the House of Keys (24 seats; members are elected by popular vote to serve five-year terms)
elections: House of Keys - last held 23 November 2006 (next to be held November 2011)
Judicial: High Court of Justice (justices are appointed by the Lord Chancellor of England on the nomination of the
lieutenant governor)
Government, but there are 24 local authorities each with its own elections. Legal system is English common law and Manx
statute
Executive: Monarch represented by Lieutenant Governor; The Chief Minister is elected by the Tynwald for a five-year
term; election last held 14 December 2006 (next to be held in December 2011)
Legislative: Bicameral Tynwald consists of the Legislative Council (an 11-member body composed of the President
of Tynwald, the Lord Bishop of Sodor and Man, a nonvoting attorney general, and eight others named by the House of
Keys) and the House of Keys (24 seats; members are elected by popular vote to serve five-year terms)
elections: House of Keys - last held 23 November 2006 (next to be held November 2011)
Judicial: High Court of Justice (justices are appointed by the Lord Chancellor of England on the nomination of the
lieutenant governor)
| LANGUAGES |
English, Manx Gaelic (about 2% of the population has some knowledge)
| BRIEF HISTORY |
The secular history of the Isle of Man during the Brythonic period remains mysterious: we have no surviving trustworthy
record of any event whatever before the incursions of the Northmen, since the exploits attributed to Báetán mac Cairill,
king of Ulster, at the end of the 6th century, formally supposed to have taken place in the Isle of Man, really occurred in
the country between the Firths of Clyde and Forth. Even if the supposed conquest of the Menavian islands - Man and
Anglesey - by Edwin of Northumbria, in 616, did take place, it could not have led to any permanent results; for, when the
English were driven from the coasts of Cumberland and Lancashire soon afterwards, they could not well have retained
their hold on the island to the west of these coasts. One can speculate, however, that when Ecfrid's Northumbrians laid
Ireland waste from Dublin to Drogheda in 684, they temporarily occupied Man. In the later part of the first millennium AD
colonists from Ireland settled in Man. Manx, a Goidelic language, provides the main evidence of this; earlier evidence
suggests that a Welsh-speaking people lived there. One big historical argument addresses whether the present Manx
language survived from pre-Norse days, or whether it reflects a linguistic reintroduction after the Norse invasion. Evidence
may yet be forthcoming to shed further light on this area of debate from the study of the landscape, place names and land
tenure. Tradition attributes the island's conversion to Christianity to St Maughold (Maccul), an Irish missionary who gives
his name to a parish. The island's name derives from Mannanan, the Brythonic and Gaelic equivalent of Neptune. During
the period of Scandinavian domination there are two main epochs -- one before the conquest of Man by Godred Crovan
in 1079, and the other after it. Warfare and unsettled rule characterize the earlier epoch; the later saw comparatively more
peace. Between about A.D. 800 and 815 the Vikings came to Man chiefly for plunder; between about 850 and 990,
when they settled in it, the island fell under the rule of the Scandinavian kings of Dublin; and between 990 and 1079, it
became subject to the powerful earls of Orkney. In the 1130s the Church sent a small mission to establish the first
bishopric on the Isle of Man, and appointed Wimund as the first Bishop. He soon after gave up his role as fisher of men,
and became the hunter of men, embarking with a band of followers on a career of murder and looting throughout Scotland
and the surrounding islands. Finally, in 1261, Alexander III of Scotland sent envoys to Norway to negotiate for the
cession of the isles, but their efforts led to no result. He therefore initiated hostilities which terminated in the indecisive
Battle of Largs against of the Norwegian fleet in 1263. However the Norwegian king Haakon Haakonsson died the
following winter, and this allowed king Alexander to bring the war to a successful conclusion. Magnus, king of Man and
the Isles (reigned 1252 - 1265), who had fought on the Norwegian side, had to surrender all the islands over which he
had ruled, except Man, for which he did homage. Two years later Magnus died and in 1266 King Magnus VI of Norway
ceded the islands, including Man, to Scotland in the Treaty of Perth in consideration of the sum of 4000 marks (known as
"merks" in Scotland) and an annuity of 100 marks. But Scotland's rule over Man did not become firmly established till
1275, when the Manx suffered defeat in a decisive battle at Ronaldsway, near Castletown. In 1290 King Edward I of
England was in possession of Man, and it remained in English hands till 1313, when Robert Bruce took it after besieging
Castle Rushen for five weeks. Then, until 1346, when the battle of Nevilles Cross decided the long struggle between
England and Scotland in England's favour, there followed a confused period when Man sometimes experienced English
rule and sometimes Scottish. About 1333 King Edward III of England granted Man to William de Montacute, 3rd Baron
Montacute, (later the 1st Earl of Salisbury), as his absolute possession, without reserving any service to be rendered to
him. With the accession of the Stanleys to the throne there begins a better epoch in Manx history. Though the island's new
rulers rarely visited its shores, they placed it under responsible governors, who, in the main, seem to have treated it with
justice. Of the thirteen members of the family who ruled in Man, the second Sir John Stanley (1414 - 1432), [[James
Stanley, 7th Earl of Derby |James, the 7th Earl]] (1627 - 1651), and the 10th Earl of the same name (1702 - 1736) had
the most important influence on it. The first curbed the power of the spiritual barons, introduced trial by jury, instead of
trial by battle, and ordered the laws to be written. The second, known as the Great Stanley, and his wife, Charlotte de la
Tremoille (or Tremouille), are probably the most striking figures in Manx history. In 1643 Charles I ordered him to go to
Man, where the people, who were no doubt influenced by what was taking place in England, threatened to revolt. But his
arrival, with English soldiers, soon put a stop to anything of this kind. He conciliated the people by his affability, brought in
Englishmen to teach various handicrafts and tried to help the farmers by improving the breed of Manx horses, and, at the
same time, he restricted the exactions of the Church. But the Manx people never had less liberty than under his rule. In
August 1651 he Stanley to England with some of his troops, among whom were 300 Manxmen, to join King Charles II,
and he and they shared in the decisive defeat of the Royalists at Worcester. He was captured and confined in Chester
Castle, and, after being tried by court martial, was executed at Bolton. Soon after his death the Manx Militia, under the
command of William Christian (known by his Manx name of Illiam Dhone), rose against the Countess and captured all the
insular forts except Rushen and Peel. They were then joined by a Parliamentary force under Colonel Duckenfield, to
whom the Countess surrendered after a brief resistance. Cromwell had appointed Thomas Fairfax Lord of Mann and the
Isles in September, so that Man continued under a monarchical government and remained in the same relation to England
as before. The restoration of Stanley government in 1660 therefore caused as little friction and alteration as its temporary
cessation had. The agrarian question subsided only in 1704, when James, Charles's brother and successor, largely through
the influence of Bishop Wilson, entered into a compact with his tenants, which became embodied in an act, called the Act
of Settlement. Their compact secured the tenants in the possession of their estates in perpetuity on condition of a fixed
rent, and a small fine on succession or alienation. From the great importance of this act to the Manx people it has been
called their Magna Carta. After 1866, when the Isle of Man obtained a measure of at least nominal Home Rule, the Manx
people have made remarkable progress, and at the present day form a prosperous community, with tax haven status and
a thriving tourist industry. The Isle of Man was used as a base for Alien Civilian Internment camps in both the First World
War (1914-18) and the Second World War (1939-45). As the century progressed, the Manx tourist economy declined
greatly, as the English and Irish started flying to Spain for package holidays. The Manx government responded to this
situation by making the island a tax haven. The 1990s and early twenty first century have seen a greater recognition of
indigenous Manx culture, such as the first Manx language primary school, as well as a general re-evaluation of the island's
economy.
Source: Wikipedia History of Isle of Man
record of any event whatever before the incursions of the Northmen, since the exploits attributed to Báetán mac Cairill,
king of Ulster, at the end of the 6th century, formally supposed to have taken place in the Isle of Man, really occurred in
the country between the Firths of Clyde and Forth. Even if the supposed conquest of the Menavian islands - Man and
Anglesey - by Edwin of Northumbria, in 616, did take place, it could not have led to any permanent results; for, when the
English were driven from the coasts of Cumberland and Lancashire soon afterwards, they could not well have retained
their hold on the island to the west of these coasts. One can speculate, however, that when Ecfrid's Northumbrians laid
Ireland waste from Dublin to Drogheda in 684, they temporarily occupied Man. In the later part of the first millennium AD
colonists from Ireland settled in Man. Manx, a Goidelic language, provides the main evidence of this; earlier evidence
suggests that a Welsh-speaking people lived there. One big historical argument addresses whether the present Manx
language survived from pre-Norse days, or whether it reflects a linguistic reintroduction after the Norse invasion. Evidence
may yet be forthcoming to shed further light on this area of debate from the study of the landscape, place names and land
tenure. Tradition attributes the island's conversion to Christianity to St Maughold (Maccul), an Irish missionary who gives
his name to a parish. The island's name derives from Mannanan, the Brythonic and Gaelic equivalent of Neptune. During
the period of Scandinavian domination there are two main epochs -- one before the conquest of Man by Godred Crovan
in 1079, and the other after it. Warfare and unsettled rule characterize the earlier epoch; the later saw comparatively more
peace. Between about A.D. 800 and 815 the Vikings came to Man chiefly for plunder; between about 850 and 990,
when they settled in it, the island fell under the rule of the Scandinavian kings of Dublin; and between 990 and 1079, it
became subject to the powerful earls of Orkney. In the 1130s the Church sent a small mission to establish the first
bishopric on the Isle of Man, and appointed Wimund as the first Bishop. He soon after gave up his role as fisher of men,
and became the hunter of men, embarking with a band of followers on a career of murder and looting throughout Scotland
and the surrounding islands. Finally, in 1261, Alexander III of Scotland sent envoys to Norway to negotiate for the
cession of the isles, but their efforts led to no result. He therefore initiated hostilities which terminated in the indecisive
Battle of Largs against of the Norwegian fleet in 1263. However the Norwegian king Haakon Haakonsson died the
following winter, and this allowed king Alexander to bring the war to a successful conclusion. Magnus, king of Man and
the Isles (reigned 1252 - 1265), who had fought on the Norwegian side, had to surrender all the islands over which he
had ruled, except Man, for which he did homage. Two years later Magnus died and in 1266 King Magnus VI of Norway
ceded the islands, including Man, to Scotland in the Treaty of Perth in consideration of the sum of 4000 marks (known as
"merks" in Scotland) and an annuity of 100 marks. But Scotland's rule over Man did not become firmly established till
1275, when the Manx suffered defeat in a decisive battle at Ronaldsway, near Castletown. In 1290 King Edward I of
England was in possession of Man, and it remained in English hands till 1313, when Robert Bruce took it after besieging
Castle Rushen for five weeks. Then, until 1346, when the battle of Nevilles Cross decided the long struggle between
England and Scotland in England's favour, there followed a confused period when Man sometimes experienced English
rule and sometimes Scottish. About 1333 King Edward III of England granted Man to William de Montacute, 3rd Baron
Montacute, (later the 1st Earl of Salisbury), as his absolute possession, without reserving any service to be rendered to
him. With the accession of the Stanleys to the throne there begins a better epoch in Manx history. Though the island's new
rulers rarely visited its shores, they placed it under responsible governors, who, in the main, seem to have treated it with
justice. Of the thirteen members of the family who ruled in Man, the second Sir John Stanley (1414 - 1432), [[James
Stanley, 7th Earl of Derby |James, the 7th Earl]] (1627 - 1651), and the 10th Earl of the same name (1702 - 1736) had
the most important influence on it. The first curbed the power of the spiritual barons, introduced trial by jury, instead of
trial by battle, and ordered the laws to be written. The second, known as the Great Stanley, and his wife, Charlotte de la
Tremoille (or Tremouille), are probably the most striking figures in Manx history. In 1643 Charles I ordered him to go to
Man, where the people, who were no doubt influenced by what was taking place in England, threatened to revolt. But his
arrival, with English soldiers, soon put a stop to anything of this kind. He conciliated the people by his affability, brought in
Englishmen to teach various handicrafts and tried to help the farmers by improving the breed of Manx horses, and, at the
same time, he restricted the exactions of the Church. But the Manx people never had less liberty than under his rule. In
August 1651 he Stanley to England with some of his troops, among whom were 300 Manxmen, to join King Charles II,
and he and they shared in the decisive defeat of the Royalists at Worcester. He was captured and confined in Chester
Castle, and, after being tried by court martial, was executed at Bolton. Soon after his death the Manx Militia, under the
command of William Christian (known by his Manx name of Illiam Dhone), rose against the Countess and captured all the
insular forts except Rushen and Peel. They were then joined by a Parliamentary force under Colonel Duckenfield, to
whom the Countess surrendered after a brief resistance. Cromwell had appointed Thomas Fairfax Lord of Mann and the
Isles in September, so that Man continued under a monarchical government and remained in the same relation to England
as before. The restoration of Stanley government in 1660 therefore caused as little friction and alteration as its temporary
cessation had. The agrarian question subsided only in 1704, when James, Charles's brother and successor, largely through
the influence of Bishop Wilson, entered into a compact with his tenants, which became embodied in an act, called the Act
of Settlement. Their compact secured the tenants in the possession of their estates in perpetuity on condition of a fixed
rent, and a small fine on succession or alienation. From the great importance of this act to the Manx people it has been
called their Magna Carta. After 1866, when the Isle of Man obtained a measure of at least nominal Home Rule, the Manx
people have made remarkable progress, and at the present day form a prosperous community, with tax haven status and
a thriving tourist industry. The Isle of Man was used as a base for Alien Civilian Internment camps in both the First World
War (1914-18) and the Second World War (1939-45). As the century progressed, the Manx tourist economy declined
greatly, as the English and Irish started flying to Spain for package holidays. The Manx government responded to this
situation by making the island a tax haven. The 1990s and early twenty first century have seen a greater recognition of
indigenous Manx culture, such as the first Manx language primary school, as well as a general re-evaluation of the island's
economy.
Source: Wikipedia History of Isle of Man
| ECONOMIC OVERVIEW |
Offshore banking, manufacturing, and tourism are key sectors of the economy. The government offers incentives to
high-technology companies and financial institutions to locate on the island; this has paid off in expanding employment
opportunities in high-income industries. As a result, agriculture and fishing, once the mainstays of the economy, have
declined in their contributions to GDP. The Isle of Man also attracts online gambling sites and the film industry. Trade is
mostly with the UK. The Isle of Man enjoys free access to EU markets.
Source: CIA World Factbook (select Man, Isle of)
high-technology companies and financial institutions to locate on the island; this has paid off in expanding employment
opportunities in high-income industries. As a result, agriculture and fishing, once the mainstays of the economy, have
declined in their contributions to GDP. The Isle of Man also attracts online gambling sites and the film industry. Trade is
mostly with the UK. The Isle of Man enjoys free access to EU markets.
Source: CIA World Factbook (select Man, Isle of)
| POLITICAL CLIMATE |
Most Manx politicians stand for election as independents rather than as representatives of political parties. Though
political parties do exist, their influence is not nearly as strong as is the case in the United Kingdom. Consequently,
much Manx legislation develops through consensus among the members of Tynwald, which contrasts with the much
more adversarial nature of the UK parliament.
The largest political party is the recently established Liberal Vannin Party, which promotes greater Manx independence
and more accountability in Government. The LibVannin party has two members of Tynwald including Leader Peter
Karran MHK. A Manx Labour Party also exists, unaffiliated to the UK Labour Party. A political pressure group Mec
Vannin advocates the establishment of a sovereign republic. The island also formerly had a Manx National Party and a
Manx Communist Party. There are Manx members in the Celtic League, a political pressure group that advocates
greater co-operation between and political autonomy for the Celtic nations.
The main political issues include the Island's relationship with the finance sector, housing prices and shortages, and the
Manx language.
The vast majority of the members of the House of Keys are non-partisan (19), with two representatives from the Manx
Labour Party and three from the Alliance for Progressive Government.
Source: Wikipedia Politics of Isle of Man
political parties do exist, their influence is not nearly as strong as is the case in the United Kingdom. Consequently,
much Manx legislation develops through consensus among the members of Tynwald, which contrasts with the much
more adversarial nature of the UK parliament.
The largest political party is the recently established Liberal Vannin Party, which promotes greater Manx independence
and more accountability in Government. The LibVannin party has two members of Tynwald including Leader Peter
Karran MHK. A Manx Labour Party also exists, unaffiliated to the UK Labour Party. A political pressure group Mec
Vannin advocates the establishment of a sovereign republic. The island also formerly had a Manx National Party and a
Manx Communist Party. There are Manx members in the Celtic League, a political pressure group that advocates
greater co-operation between and political autonomy for the Celtic nations.
The main political issues include the Island's relationship with the finance sector, housing prices and shortages, and the
Manx language.
The vast majority of the members of the House of Keys are non-partisan (19), with two representatives from the Manx
Labour Party and three from the Alliance for Progressive Government.
Source: Wikipedia Politics of Isle of Man
| INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES |
None reported.
| REFUGEES AND INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS (IDP) |
None reported.
| ILLICIT DRUGS |
None reported.
| HUMAN RIGHTS STATEMENTS, ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUES |
INCSR 2008 Volume II
Money Laundering and Financial Crimes
Isle of Man
The Isle of Man (IOM) is a Crown Dependency of the United Kingdom with its own parliament, government, and laws. Its large
and sophisticated financial center is potentially vulnerable to money laundering at the layering and integration stages. Most of the
illicit funds in the IOM are from fraud schemes and narcotics trafficking in other jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom. The
U.S. dollar is the most common currency used for criminal activity in the IOM. Identity theft and Internet abuse are growing
segments of financial crime activity.
No current data regarding the entities that comprise the IOM financial industry has been reported. As of September 30, 2004, the
IOM’s financial industry consisted of approximately 19 life insurance companies, 25 insurance managers, more than 177 captive
insurance companies, 53 licensed banks and two licensed building societies, 82 investment business license holders, 30.1 billion
pounds (approximately U.S. $59 billion) in bank deposits, and 164 collective investment schemes with 6.5 billion pounds
(approximately U.S. $12.7 billion) of funds under management. There were also 171 licensed corporate service providers.
The IOM criminalized money laundering related to narcotics trafficking in 1987. The Criminal Justice (Money Laundering
Offenses) Act 1998, extends the definition of money laundering to cover all serious crimes and led to the creation of the Anti-
Money Laundering (AML) Code, which came into force in December 1998. The AML Code has subsequently been replaced by the
Criminal Justice (Money Laundering) Code 2007 (the Code), enacted in September 2007. Requirements under the 2007 Code apply
to banking, investment, and collective investment schemes, fiduciary services business, insurance, building societies, credit unions,
local authorities authorized to raise or borrow money, bureaux de change, estate agents, bookmakers and casinos (excluding online
gambling), accountants, notaries and legal practitioners, insurance intermediaries, retirement benefits schemes, administrators
and trustees, auditors, the Post Office, and any activity involving money transmission services or check encashment facilities.
The Code requires that obligated entities implement AML policies, procedures, and practices, including employing them for
countering terrorist financing. The Code mandates that obligated entities institute procedures to establish customer identification
requirements; report suspicious transactions; maintain adequate records; adopt adequate internal controls and communication
procedures; provide appropriate training for employees; and establish internal reporting protocols. There is no minimum threshold
for obliged entities to file a suspicious transaction report (STR), and safe harbor provisions in the law protect reporting individuals
when they file an STR. It is an offense to fail to disclose suspicion of money laundering for all predicate crimes. Failure to comply
with the requirements of the Code may bring a fine, imprisonment of up to two years, or both.
Click here to read more »
Money Laundering and Financial Crimes
Isle of Man
The Isle of Man (IOM) is a Crown Dependency of the United Kingdom with its own parliament, government, and laws. Its large
and sophisticated financial center is potentially vulnerable to money laundering at the layering and integration stages. Most of the
illicit funds in the IOM are from fraud schemes and narcotics trafficking in other jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom. The
U.S. dollar is the most common currency used for criminal activity in the IOM. Identity theft and Internet abuse are growing
segments of financial crime activity.
No current data regarding the entities that comprise the IOM financial industry has been reported. As of September 30, 2004, the
IOM’s financial industry consisted of approximately 19 life insurance companies, 25 insurance managers, more than 177 captive
insurance companies, 53 licensed banks and two licensed building societies, 82 investment business license holders, 30.1 billion
pounds (approximately U.S. $59 billion) in bank deposits, and 164 collective investment schemes with 6.5 billion pounds
(approximately U.S. $12.7 billion) of funds under management. There were also 171 licensed corporate service providers.
The IOM criminalized money laundering related to narcotics trafficking in 1987. The Criminal Justice (Money Laundering
Offenses) Act 1998, extends the definition of money laundering to cover all serious crimes and led to the creation of the Anti-
Money Laundering (AML) Code, which came into force in December 1998. The AML Code has subsequently been replaced by the
Criminal Justice (Money Laundering) Code 2007 (the Code), enacted in September 2007. Requirements under the 2007 Code apply
to banking, investment, and collective investment schemes, fiduciary services business, insurance, building societies, credit unions,
local authorities authorized to raise or borrow money, bureaux de change, estate agents, bookmakers and casinos (excluding online
gambling), accountants, notaries and legal practitioners, insurance intermediaries, retirement benefits schemes, administrators
and trustees, auditors, the Post Office, and any activity involving money transmission services or check encashment facilities.
The Code requires that obligated entities implement AML policies, procedures, and practices, including employing them for
countering terrorist financing. The Code mandates that obligated entities institute procedures to establish customer identification
requirements; report suspicious transactions; maintain adequate records; adopt adequate internal controls and communication
procedures; provide appropriate training for employees; and establish internal reporting protocols. There is no minimum threshold
for obliged entities to file a suspicious transaction report (STR), and safe harbor provisions in the law protect reporting individuals
when they file an STR. It is an offense to fail to disclose suspicion of money laundering for all predicate crimes. Failure to comply
with the requirements of the Code may bring a fine, imprisonment of up to two years, or both.
Click here to read more »
Celtic League - Languages Declaration call at UN
12/06/08
Dear Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze
Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights (UDLR)
I am writing to you ahead of the planned presentation of a resolution proposal to the UN Human Rights Council on 17th of June
2008, to promote within the United Nations a Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights (UDLR) for adoption as an International
Convention.
As you will be aware the UDLR is a document that represents the individual and collective linguistic rights of all peoples and is
widely representative. The Celtic League was one of the original signatories of the Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights
(UDLR) on 6th June 1996 and the only one of the 61 non governmental organisations representing the linguistic rights of all the
Celtic nations (Alba/Scotland, Breizh/Brittany,
Cymru/Wales, Éire/Ireland, Kernow/Cornwall, Mannin/Isle of Man).
The main idea behind the UDLR was for the Declaration to be adopted as a universal convention by the United Nations for state
governments across the world to adhere to and use as a reference. The Celtic League then would like to urge you, as a body, to
adopt the UDLR and to push for its acceptance by state governments around the world.
The linguistic rights of the Celtic peoples has improved to a large extend since 1996, but there are still a number of areas where
users of Celtic languages have no or few rights. We believe that the adoption of the UDLR as an International Convention by the
UN would further the human and linguistic rights of the Celtic speaking peoples and would be an excellent opportunity, during the
UN International Year of Languages 2008, to enhance the linguistic rights of users of endangered languages everywhere.
The resolution proposal will be made from 2p.m. to 4p.m. at the United Nations headquarters (Palais des Nations) in Geneva,
Switzerland and, as it states in the proposal, we look forward to the future announcement by the Human Rights Council to create,
within the United Nations, a Commission to prepare a future Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights.
Click here to read more »
12/06/08
Dear Mr. Sergei Ordzhonikidze
Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights (UDLR)
I am writing to you ahead of the planned presentation of a resolution proposal to the UN Human Rights Council on 17th of June
2008, to promote within the United Nations a Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights (UDLR) for adoption as an International
Convention.
As you will be aware the UDLR is a document that represents the individual and collective linguistic rights of all peoples and is
widely representative. The Celtic League was one of the original signatories of the Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights
(UDLR) on 6th June 1996 and the only one of the 61 non governmental organisations representing the linguistic rights of all the
Celtic nations (Alba/Scotland, Breizh/Brittany,
Cymru/Wales, Éire/Ireland, Kernow/Cornwall, Mannin/Isle of Man).
The main idea behind the UDLR was for the Declaration to be adopted as a universal convention by the United Nations for state
governments across the world to adhere to and use as a reference. The Celtic League then would like to urge you, as a body, to
adopt the UDLR and to push for its acceptance by state governments around the world.
The linguistic rights of the Celtic peoples has improved to a large extend since 1996, but there are still a number of areas where
users of Celtic languages have no or few rights. We believe that the adoption of the UDLR as an International Convention by the
UN would further the human and linguistic rights of the Celtic speaking peoples and would be an excellent opportunity, during the
UN International Year of Languages 2008, to enhance the linguistic rights of users of endangered languages everywhere.
The resolution proposal will be made from 2p.m. to 4p.m. at the United Nations headquarters (Palais des Nations) in Geneva,
Switzerland and, as it states in the proposal, we look forward to the future announcement by the Human Rights Council to create,
within the United Nations, a Commission to prepare a future Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights.
Click here to read more »
FREEDOM IN THE WORLD 2006 REPORT
United Kingdom
The center-left Labour party and the center-right Conservative Party dominate the political scene-one or the other has governed
without coalition partners since World War II. The Liberal Democratic Party, now somewhat to the left of Labour, is the
third-largest party. The other chief parties are mainly regional. These include the Welsh-nationalist Plaid Cymru and the Scottish
National Party. They also include several parties in Northern Ireland: Sinn Fein and the Social Democratic and Labour party (both
Catholic and republican), and the Ulster Unionist Party and the Democratic Unionist Party (both Protestant and unionist).
After a period of centralization under Conservative governments from 1979 to 1997, the Labour Party made constitutional reform a
key part of its 1997 election platform. In government, it has delivered a far-reaching (though asymmetrical) devolution of power to
Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. The first elections to the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly were held in 1999.
The Scottish body has more power (including some tax-raising powers) than its Welsh counterpart, largely because of stronger
separatist sentiment in Scotland. Welsh nationalism is largely cultural; with official protection and encouragement, the number of
Welsh-language speakers actually grew 17 percent from 1991 to 2001. The Northern Ireland Assembly was suspended in October
2002 after complications in the peace process.
The government is largely free of pervasive corruption. However, in November 2005, the home secretary, David Blunkett, was
forced to resign from the cabinet a second time, after failing to report according to parliamentary rules that he had taken paid work
while he was out of the cabinet. The United Kingdom was ranked 11 out of 159 countries surveyed in Transparency International's
2005 Corruption Perceptions Index.
Click here to read more »
United Kingdom
The center-left Labour party and the center-right Conservative Party dominate the political scene-one or the other has governed
without coalition partners since World War II. The Liberal Democratic Party, now somewhat to the left of Labour, is the
third-largest party. The other chief parties are mainly regional. These include the Welsh-nationalist Plaid Cymru and the Scottish
National Party. They also include several parties in Northern Ireland: Sinn Fein and the Social Democratic and Labour party (both
Catholic and republican), and the Ulster Unionist Party and the Democratic Unionist Party (both Protestant and unionist).
After a period of centralization under Conservative governments from 1979 to 1997, the Labour Party made constitutional reform a
key part of its 1997 election platform. In government, it has delivered a far-reaching (though asymmetrical) devolution of power to
Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. The first elections to the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly were held in 1999.
The Scottish body has more power (including some tax-raising powers) than its Welsh counterpart, largely because of stronger
separatist sentiment in Scotland. Welsh nationalism is largely cultural; with official protection and encouragement, the number of
Welsh-language speakers actually grew 17 percent from 1991 to 2001. The Northern Ireland Assembly was suspended in October
2002 after complications in the peace process.
The government is largely free of pervasive corruption. However, in November 2005, the home secretary, David Blunkett, was
forced to resign from the cabinet a second time, after failing to report according to parliamentary rules that he had taken paid work
while he was out of the cabinet. The United Kingdom was ranked 11 out of 159 countries surveyed in Transparency International's
2005 Corruption Perceptions Index.
Click here to read more »
Document - Love, hate and the law: decriminalizing homosexuality
04 July 2008
Summary
By institutionalizing discrimination, laws criminalizing homosexuality reinforce systemic disadvantage of lesbians, gay men and
bisexual people and against transgender people, who may be heterosexual, and act as an official incitement to or justification for
violence against them, whether in custody, in prison, on the street or in the home. These laws allow law enforcement officials to
invade the private residences of individuals alleged to be engaging in consensual same-sex sexual relations. They can result in
impunity for arbitrary arrests on the basis of allegations about sexual orientation, rumours of sexual behaviour or objection to
gender presentation, with few, if any, consequences for torture or other ill-treatment. Homophobic and transphobic individuals or
groups take these laws as permission to target lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, organizations and events. Survivors of
human rights abuses may have no recourse to justice and be deprived of access to redress. Without the fundamental protection of
legality, it is impossible for activists to form organizations and campaign for the right to engage in consensual same-sex practices,
or even to meet in public. Even their use of the internet in private can be used in prosecutions against them.
The paper explores the different legal approaches to criminalizing homosexuality, including less direct approaches that may not
explicitly criminalize same-sex sexual conduct but instead seek to prevent the promotion of homosexuality, protect children, or
respond to public health concerns. Increasingly we are seeing the invocation of a link between criminalization and morality and how
criminalization of same-sex sexual acts and, increasingly, of same-sex marriage is used by some states to whip up a “moral panic”
against lesbians and gay men. Though rarely used in some of the seven countries where men – and four countries where women –
may be sentenced to death for same-sex sexual relations, the very fact that the death penalty applies is a breach of international
human rights law. Several countries have, or have had, laws criminalizing homosexuality on the statute books though those laws
are never enforced. The continued existence of such a law functions to repress those who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual,
those who want to explore same-sex sexuality, and those who defy the strict categorisation and accepted “norms” of two gender
categories.
Criminalization of homosexuality does not prevent the proscribed consensual sexual acts, nor is it the only barrier to full equality.
Decriminalization is not the whole answer, but it is a key step towards respecting, protecting and fulfilling the human rights of
lesbian, gay, bisexual, same-sex practicing and transgender people.
Concepts of sexuality and gender are contested in all societies. In the UK and some of its former territories there has been a move
to decriminalization of homosexuality and equality for lesbians, gay men and transgender people. Same-sex sexual acts were
criminalized in England and Wales until 1967. In Scotland sex between two men was not decriminalized until 1980. However it took
the intervention of the European Court to ensure decriminalization in Northern Ireland5, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.
Click here to read more »
04 July 2008
Summary
By institutionalizing discrimination, laws criminalizing homosexuality reinforce systemic disadvantage of lesbians, gay men and
bisexual people and against transgender people, who may be heterosexual, and act as an official incitement to or justification for
violence against them, whether in custody, in prison, on the street or in the home. These laws allow law enforcement officials to
invade the private residences of individuals alleged to be engaging in consensual same-sex sexual relations. They can result in
impunity for arbitrary arrests on the basis of allegations about sexual orientation, rumours of sexual behaviour or objection to
gender presentation, with few, if any, consequences for torture or other ill-treatment. Homophobic and transphobic individuals or
groups take these laws as permission to target lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, organizations and events. Survivors of
human rights abuses may have no recourse to justice and be deprived of access to redress. Without the fundamental protection of
legality, it is impossible for activists to form organizations and campaign for the right to engage in consensual same-sex practices,
or even to meet in public. Even their use of the internet in private can be used in prosecutions against them.
The paper explores the different legal approaches to criminalizing homosexuality, including less direct approaches that may not
explicitly criminalize same-sex sexual conduct but instead seek to prevent the promotion of homosexuality, protect children, or
respond to public health concerns. Increasingly we are seeing the invocation of a link between criminalization and morality and how
criminalization of same-sex sexual acts and, increasingly, of same-sex marriage is used by some states to whip up a “moral panic”
against lesbians and gay men. Though rarely used in some of the seven countries where men – and four countries where women –
may be sentenced to death for same-sex sexual relations, the very fact that the death penalty applies is a breach of international
human rights law. Several countries have, or have had, laws criminalizing homosexuality on the statute books though those laws
are never enforced. The continued existence of such a law functions to repress those who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual,
those who want to explore same-sex sexuality, and those who defy the strict categorisation and accepted “norms” of two gender
categories.
Criminalization of homosexuality does not prevent the proscribed consensual sexual acts, nor is it the only barrier to full equality.
Decriminalization is not the whole answer, but it is a key step towards respecting, protecting and fulfilling the human rights of
lesbian, gay, bisexual, same-sex practicing and transgender people.
Concepts of sexuality and gender are contested in all societies. In the UK and some of its former territories there has been a move
to decriminalization of homosexuality and equality for lesbians, gay men and transgender people. Same-sex sexual acts were
criminalized in England and Wales until 1967. In Scotland sex between two men was not decriminalized until 1980. However it took
the intervention of the European Court to ensure decriminalization in Northern Ireland5, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.
Click here to read more »
Regional Restraints on Corporal Punishment
The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
Thus, in the Case of Costello-Roberts,54 the European Court held by five votes to four that three whacks of a slipper by a
headmaster against a seven-year-old's bottom did not rise to the requisite level of severity to constitute a violation of human rights
norms.55 The four dissenters, however, stated that "the official and formalised nature of the punishment meted out, without
adequate consent of the mother, was degrading to the applicant and violated Article 3."56 Although it has hesitated to declare all
forms of corporal punishment violations of the European Convention, the court has noted with approval the general trend toward
the abolition of corporal punishment."57 Even in Costello-Roberts, the court took pains to note that it was not endorsing corporal
punishment, stating explicitly that it did not "[wish] to be taken to approve in any way the retention of corporal punishment as part
of the disciplinary regime of a school."58
57 In Tyrer, the court stated that "recent developments and commonly accepted standards in the penal policy of member states of
the Council of Europe influence the Court's interpretation . . . ." The court looked to these developments and not to the general
cultural conditions on the Isle of Man when deciding that the caning violated the European Convention. The court held that it was
irrelevant that a majority of the population on the Isle supported corporal punishment or that corporal punishment may deter
criminal activity. Tyrer, para. 31.
Click here to read more »
The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
Thus, in the Case of Costello-Roberts,54 the European Court held by five votes to four that three whacks of a slipper by a
headmaster against a seven-year-old's bottom did not rise to the requisite level of severity to constitute a violation of human rights
norms.55 The four dissenters, however, stated that "the official and formalised nature of the punishment meted out, without
adequate consent of the mother, was degrading to the applicant and violated Article 3."56 Although it has hesitated to declare all
forms of corporal punishment violations of the European Convention, the court has noted with approval the general trend toward
the abolition of corporal punishment."57 Even in Costello-Roberts, the court took pains to note that it was not endorsing corporal
punishment, stating explicitly that it did not "[wish] to be taken to approve in any way the retention of corporal punishment as part
of the disciplinary regime of a school."58
57 In Tyrer, the court stated that "recent developments and commonly accepted standards in the penal policy of member states of
the Council of Europe influence the Court's interpretation . . . ." The court looked to these developments and not to the general
cultural conditions on the Isle of Man when deciding that the caning violated the European Convention. The court held that it was
irrelevant that a majority of the population on the Isle supported corporal punishment or that corporal punishment may deter
criminal activity. Tyrer, para. 31.
Click here to read more »
Isle of Man aspirations for enhanced international profile supported by UK Justice Committee - Chief Secretary's Office
Press Release
30 March 2010
Chief Minister Tony Brown MHK today (March 30, 2010) welcomed a report by the UK House of Commons Justice Committee
that supports the Isle of Man’s aspirations for enhancing its international profile and developing further opportunities to represent
itself on the world stage.
The Committee examined how the UK Government fulfils its constitutional responsibilities for Crown Dependencies, primarily
through the Ministry of Justice which manages the UK’s relationship with the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey.
The Chief Minister said:
‘It is clear that the Committee listened to and appreciated the wide range of points we made, especially about our desire to
strengthen the Isle of Man’s political and diplomatic relations with other countries '
The report acknowledges that the Crown Dependencies are ‘democratic, self-governing communities with free press and open
debate’ and recognises their ‘essential independence from the UK, their independence from each other and the fact that their
interests need to be considered routinely by all government Departments in any area of policy-making likely to impact on them.’
The Committee addressed the handling of the termination of the Reciprocal Health Agreement saying
‘We believe the lack of consultation, and discussion of possible options, with each Crown Dependency was a failing in the UK
Government’s approach to its responsibilities.'
The Chief Minister said:
'It is particularly helpful that the Committee stated, in strong terms, that the UK Government has a duty to represent our interests
on the international stage, even when our interests are not the same as those of the UK. The Committee picked up on the
recommendations made in our submission about finding appropriate mechanisms to represent our interests effectively in
international discussions, and we hope to be able to work with the Ministry of Justice to put some of those measures into action.
The Isle of Man Government looks forward to further developing our existing and positive relationship with the Ministry of Justice
and building stronger relationships with other UK departments. The Island has increasingly represented its own interests in world
affairs in recent years in order to reflect the differences between UK and Manx law and policies – most notably by concluding a
significant number of bilateral tax agreements -- and we welcome a further endorsement of this approach.'
Click here to read more »
Press Release
30 March 2010
Chief Minister Tony Brown MHK today (March 30, 2010) welcomed a report by the UK House of Commons Justice Committee
that supports the Isle of Man’s aspirations for enhancing its international profile and developing further opportunities to represent
itself on the world stage.
The Committee examined how the UK Government fulfils its constitutional responsibilities for Crown Dependencies, primarily
through the Ministry of Justice which manages the UK’s relationship with the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey.
The Chief Minister said:
‘It is clear that the Committee listened to and appreciated the wide range of points we made, especially about our desire to
strengthen the Isle of Man’s political and diplomatic relations with other countries '
The report acknowledges that the Crown Dependencies are ‘democratic, self-governing communities with free press and open
debate’ and recognises their ‘essential independence from the UK, their independence from each other and the fact that their
interests need to be considered routinely by all government Departments in any area of policy-making likely to impact on them.’
The Committee addressed the handling of the termination of the Reciprocal Health Agreement saying
‘We believe the lack of consultation, and discussion of possible options, with each Crown Dependency was a failing in the UK
Government’s approach to its responsibilities.'
The Chief Minister said:
'It is particularly helpful that the Committee stated, in strong terms, that the UK Government has a duty to represent our interests
on the international stage, even when our interests are not the same as those of the UK. The Committee picked up on the
recommendations made in our submission about finding appropriate mechanisms to represent our interests effectively in
international discussions, and we hope to be able to work with the Ministry of Justice to put some of those measures into action.
The Isle of Man Government looks forward to further developing our existing and positive relationship with the Ministry of Justice
and building stronger relationships with other UK departments. The Island has increasingly represented its own interests in world
affairs in recent years in order to reflect the differences between UK and Manx law and policies – most notably by concluding a
significant number of bilateral tax agreements -- and we welcome a further endorsement of this approach.'
Click here to read more »
22nd July 2010
New police complaints procedure endorsed by Tynwald
THE Department of Home plans to introduce a new, more independent police complaints procedure next year.
At its sitting last week, Tynwald approved the Report on the Isle of Man Police Complaints Process and its recommendation that
the Department progress the proposed comprehensive complaints process as quickly as possible through a Police (Amendment) Bill
and associated Regulations. Home Affairs Minister Adrian Earnshaw sought a combined vote when the motion failed to win the
support of Legislative Council in May (voting was Keys: 18 for; 5 against; Legislative Council: 3 for; 4 against).
Further to the combined vote last week, (19 votes for; 10 against), the Department is preparing drafting instructions to expedite
drafting of the Bill.
Home Affairs Minister Adrian Earnshaw MHK said:
‘The review of the police complaints process was prompted by the recommendations of the Select Committee of Tynwald in
relation to a Petition by Roy Redmayne.
‘The Department has been mindful of the need to develop a system that is robust and is likely to command public confidence. As
a result, a new process has been designed around the current Police Complaints Administrative Process, which was put in place
more than three years ago in response to the problems experienced by complainants at that time. This has proved to be successful
in dealing with complaints in a timely and effective manner, whilst avoiding the requirement to find large budgetary increases to
fund the process.
‘The new process will provide increased independence, greater auditing, and an appeal process under a tribunal.’
Retired advocates have since the early 1990s been appointed as independent Police Complaints Commissioners and have supervised
the investigation of complaints, which were and are still assigned to an investigating police officer within the IoM Constabulary
unless the Police Complaints Commissioner decides to call in an outside police force to investigate.
The current Police Complaints Commissioner is highly respected local advocate Geoff Karran MBE. More details of his role can be
found here.
The report paves the way for the Police Complaints Commissioner to be re-named Police Ombudsman. Complainants who are not
satisfied with the decision of the Police Ombudsman would have the right to appeal to the independent Police Complaints Appeals
Tribunal.
Changing the law will formalise the process that has been effective, including setting time limits for investigating complaints and
setting down requirements for investigation reports to provide clarity on each stage of the investigation, how the conclusions are
reached and whether complaints are upheld or not. It also enables reporting to identify any learning for the Constabulary or other
individuals.
The Department has recognised that there remain a number of areas where protection for the public who make complaints can be
improved, beyond that provided in other jurisdictions, and these have been incorporated in the new process. Measures include:-
* Improving the independence of the process by removing the involvement of the Department in the appointment of the newly
named Police Ombudsman;
* The introduction of a tri monthly audit of informally resolved complaints by the Ombudsman to ensure this process is fair to
complainants;
* Powers to continue investigations against retired officers;
* Added involvement of the Ombudsman in the right to direct what disciplinary action should be taken against police officers
where complaints are substantiated;
* The right of the complainant to meet with the Ombudsman;
* The introduction of an Appeal to a Tribunal to consider decisions of the Ombudsman. This is not provided in the UK or other
jurisdictions and is a further layer of independence; and-
* External audit of the process.
The Report details how, while considering the appropriate way to develop the police complaints process, the Department gave due
regard to established practices elsewhere in Europe. Throughout these jurisdictions, with the exception of Northern Ireland, the
investigation of the majority of complaints occurs within the police force concerned.
The DHA concluded that the Isle of Man would be better served by establishing in law the interim process currently in place with
additional safeguards contained in the proposal but without the need for establishing a costly police complaints body and its
associated support services, which only Northern Ireland has to deal with specific policing issues that arise there.
Click here to read more »
New police complaints procedure endorsed by Tynwald
THE Department of Home plans to introduce a new, more independent police complaints procedure next year.
At its sitting last week, Tynwald approved the Report on the Isle of Man Police Complaints Process and its recommendation that
the Department progress the proposed comprehensive complaints process as quickly as possible through a Police (Amendment) Bill
and associated Regulations. Home Affairs Minister Adrian Earnshaw sought a combined vote when the motion failed to win the
support of Legislative Council in May (voting was Keys: 18 for; 5 against; Legislative Council: 3 for; 4 against).
Further to the combined vote last week, (19 votes for; 10 against), the Department is preparing drafting instructions to expedite
drafting of the Bill.
Home Affairs Minister Adrian Earnshaw MHK said:
‘The review of the police complaints process was prompted by the recommendations of the Select Committee of Tynwald in
relation to a Petition by Roy Redmayne.
‘The Department has been mindful of the need to develop a system that is robust and is likely to command public confidence. As
a result, a new process has been designed around the current Police Complaints Administrative Process, which was put in place
more than three years ago in response to the problems experienced by complainants at that time. This has proved to be successful
in dealing with complaints in a timely and effective manner, whilst avoiding the requirement to find large budgetary increases to
fund the process.
‘The new process will provide increased independence, greater auditing, and an appeal process under a tribunal.’
Retired advocates have since the early 1990s been appointed as independent Police Complaints Commissioners and have supervised
the investigation of complaints, which were and are still assigned to an investigating police officer within the IoM Constabulary
unless the Police Complaints Commissioner decides to call in an outside police force to investigate.
The current Police Complaints Commissioner is highly respected local advocate Geoff Karran MBE. More details of his role can be
found here.
The report paves the way for the Police Complaints Commissioner to be re-named Police Ombudsman. Complainants who are not
satisfied with the decision of the Police Ombudsman would have the right to appeal to the independent Police Complaints Appeals
Tribunal.
Changing the law will formalise the process that has been effective, including setting time limits for investigating complaints and
setting down requirements for investigation reports to provide clarity on each stage of the investigation, how the conclusions are
reached and whether complaints are upheld or not. It also enables reporting to identify any learning for the Constabulary or other
individuals.
The Department has recognised that there remain a number of areas where protection for the public who make complaints can be
improved, beyond that provided in other jurisdictions, and these have been incorporated in the new process. Measures include:-
* Improving the independence of the process by removing the involvement of the Department in the appointment of the newly
named Police Ombudsman;
* The introduction of a tri monthly audit of informally resolved complaints by the Ombudsman to ensure this process is fair to
complainants;
* Powers to continue investigations against retired officers;
* Added involvement of the Ombudsman in the right to direct what disciplinary action should be taken against police officers
where complaints are substantiated;
* The right of the complainant to meet with the Ombudsman;
* The introduction of an Appeal to a Tribunal to consider decisions of the Ombudsman. This is not provided in the UK or other
jurisdictions and is a further layer of independence; and-
* External audit of the process.
The Report details how, while considering the appropriate way to develop the police complaints process, the Department gave due
regard to established practices elsewhere in Europe. Throughout these jurisdictions, with the exception of Northern Ireland, the
investigation of the majority of complaints occurs within the police force concerned.
The DHA concluded that the Isle of Man would be better served by establishing in law the interim process currently in place with
additional safeguards contained in the proposal but without the need for establishing a costly police complaints body and its
associated support services, which only Northern Ireland has to deal with specific policing issues that arise there.
Click here to read more »
Bus Vannin- We want Gaelic signs back on Buses in Isle of Mann!!!
27 July 2010
code)or Contact Online- http://www.iombusandrail.info/contact.html they are an Isle of Mann Bus company- they should act like
it- We want signs in both English and Manx Gaelic. We should have Bilingual signs on the Isle of Mann Buses! It is extremely
important to make Manx Gaelic as much part of every day life as possible and BUSINESSES ON THE ISLE OF MANN have a
responsibility to maintain the use of Gaelic where they are able. They have been doing it up to now, and now they have stopped, we
don't want them to stop using bilingual signs!
Click here to read more »
27 July 2010
code)or Contact Online- http://www.iombusandrail.info/contact.html they are an Isle of Mann Bus company- they should act like
it- We want signs in both English and Manx Gaelic. We should have Bilingual signs on the Isle of Mann Buses! It is extremely
important to make Manx Gaelic as much part of every day life as possible and BUSINESSES ON THE ISLE OF MANN have a
responsibility to maintain the use of Gaelic where they are able. They have been doing it up to now, and now they have stopped, we
don't want them to stop using bilingual signs!
Click here to read more »
Represented by
Sir Paul K. Haddacks
Lieutenant Governor since 17 October 2005
Sir Paul K. Haddacks
Lieutenant Governor since 17 October 2005
| Click map for larger view |
| Click flag for Country Report |
| TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS |
None reported.