Gonçalo Amaral's life is still on hold

PeterMac has told me that Dr Amaral has still not been paid by the McCanns and that his assets remain frozen.

That's disgraceful, how can this be? Even if the McCanns' were to win their EU court action I thought it would have no bearing on Portugal's Supreme Court conclusion?
What are Mr Amaral's solicitors' doing about it, do we know?

I can understand the Mc's holding off paying the legal costs until the last possible moment, hence the apparently nonsensical, but delaying, ECHR appeal, but after the final Portuguese judgement last year in favour of GA, why should his assets still be frozen?

Is It possible that someone could get in touch with mr. Amaral and ask ?surely he would know ,but ofcourse ,it could be a good reason that he has not chased it YET?

Joyce, PeterMac is in regular contact with Mr Amaral. That's how I got this information.

Peter said: I guess they have to wait for the Court process to grind inexorably on, and are unable or unwilling to push too hard.

What would be the legal implications of them refusing to pay? Would they have to declare themselves bankrupt to get out of paying?
I'm wondering what their game plan is.

It's apparent that team McCann are playing a game here.  That haven't a cat in hell's chance of presenting a case before the ECHR, unless of course they're intending to sue Portugal as a nation .

Something is not quite right.  It could however be only delays due to legal processes - they're not exactly known for speed.  

I can't understand why Gonçalo Amaral's assets remain frozen.

Shameful and utterly disgraceful. What they have subjected Mr Amaral to is , well, words fail me. 

If this was the other way around they'd be screaming for the money! 
Surely his assists could at least be unfrozen, what grounds do they have not to do that? I bet they never returned the books they ceases either? 


Does anyone know when Brexit happens if this would affect the ECHR claim process ?

Verdi wrote:It's apparent that team McCann are playing a game here.  That haven't a cat in hell's chance of presenting a case before the ECHR, unless of course they're intending to sue Portugal as a nation .

Something is not quite right.  It could however be only delays due to legal processes - they're not exactly known for speed.  

I can't understand why Gonçalo Amaral's assets remain frozen.

I assume that's the Court process Peter was referring to.

nglfi wrote:What would be the legal implications of them refusing to pay? Would they have to declare themselves bankrupt to get out of paying?
I'm wondering what their game plan is.

I was thinking much on those lines but it doesn't explain why Amaral's assets are still frozen.  

The movement of the Fund Limited Company over the past year indicates something is happening. like shifting a large sum into fixed assets and perhaps juggling the remainder to be absorbed by unexpected expenditure

Get'emGonçalo wrote:

Verdi wrote:It's apparent that team McCann are playing a game here.  That haven't a cat in hell's chance of presenting a case before the ECHR, unless of course they're intending to sue Portugal as a nation .

Something is not quite right.  It could however be only delays due to legal processes - they're not exactly known for speed.  

I can't understand why Gonçalo Amaral's assets remain frozen.

I assume that's the Court process Peter was referring to.

Aha -  I see!  This one's for me -----> .

If they were to declare themselves bankrupt wouldn't they have to sell their house and be expected to downsize?

As they've got two children I'm sure they'd be able to get on the council house waiting list.

Then maybe once they become chavs the media will go after them like they did Karen Matthews.

19- Who can bring a case to the Court? The Convention makes a distinction between two types of application: individual applications lodged by any person, group of individuals, company or NGO having a complaint about a violation of their rights, and inter-State applications brought by one State against another. Since the Court was established, almost all applications have been lodged by individuals who have brought their cases directly to the Court alleging one or more violations of the Convention

22- What is the difference between an individual application and an inter-State application? Most applications before the Court are individual applications lodged by private persons. A State may also lodge an application against another State Party to the Convention; this is called an inter-State application

33- Can the Court order interim measures? When the Court receives an application it may decide that a State should take certain measures provisionally while it continues its examination of the case. This usually consists of requesting a State to refrain from doing something, such as not returning individuals to countries where it is alleged that they would face death or torture.

From the above it could well be that the McCanns have lodged a challenge against the State of Portugal with the E.C.H.R. It may well be that the E.C.H.R. has issued an interim order which maintains the status quo until it returns a verdict.

So what rights have been violated?

The ECHR is governed by the European Convention on Human Rights - guidelines as follows..

Article 1 – respecting rights
Simply binds the signatory parties to secure the rights under the other Articles of the Convention "within their jurisdiction". In exceptional cases, "jurisdiction" may not be confined to a Contracting State's own national territory; the obligation to secure Convention rights then also extends to foreign territories, such as occupied land in which the State exercises effective control.

Article 2 – life
Protects the right of every person to their life.

Article 3 – torture
Prohibits torture and "inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment

Article 4 – servitude
Prohibits slavery, servitude and forced labour but exempts labour:

Article 5 – liberty and security
Provides that everyone has the right to liberty and security of person

Article 6 – fair trial
Provides a detailed right to a fair trial,

Article 7 – retroactivity
Prohibits the retroactive criminalisation of acts and omissions

Article 8 – privacy
Provides a right to respect for one's "private and family life, his home and his correspondence", subject to certain restrictions that are "in accordance with law" and "necessary in a democratic society".

Article 9 – conscience and religion
Provides a right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This includes the freedom to change a religion or belief, and to manifest a religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance, subject to certain restrictions that are "in accordance with law" and "necessary in a democratic society"

Article 10 – expression
Provides the right to freedom of expression, subject to certain restrictions that are "in accordance with law" and "necessary in a democratic society"

Article 11 – association
Protects the right to freedom of assembly and association, including the right to form trade unions, subject to certain restrictions that are "in accordance with law" and "necessary in a democratic society".

Article 12 – marriage
Provides a right for women and men of marriageable age to marry and establish a family.

Article 13 – effective remedy
Provides for the right for an effective remedy before national authorities for violations of rights under the Convention

Article 14 – discrimination
Contains a prohibition of discrimination. This prohibition is broad in some ways and narrow in others. It is broad in that it prohibits discrimination under a potentially unlimited number of grounds

Article 15 – derogations
Allows contracting states to derogate from certain rights guaranteed by the Convention in a time of "war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation".

Article 16 – aliens
Allows states to restrict the political activity of foreigners. The Court has ruled that European Union member states cannot consider the nationals of other member states to be aliens

Article 17 – abuse of rights
Provides that no one may use the rights guaranteed by the Convention to seek the abolition or limitation of rights guaranteed in the Convention. This addresses instances where states seek to restrict a human right in the name of another human right, or where individuals rely on a human right to undermine other human rights (for example where an individual issues a death threat).

Article 18 – permitted restrictions
Provides that any limitations on the rights provided for in the Convention may be used only for the purpose for which they are provided. For example, Article 5, which guarantees the right to personal freedom, may be explicitly limited in order to bring a suspect before a judge. To use pre-trial detention as a means of intimidation of a person under a false pretext is, therefore, a limitation of right (to freedom) which does not serve an explicitly provided purpose (to be brought before a judge), and is therefore contrary to Article 18.
~~~~~~~~~~

If the McCanns have truly been advised to take on this fight (which I seriously doubt), I feel they are punching above their weight.  They can't even opt for Article 8 - privacy, as they exposed themselves to the world through the media.  To present a valid case, they first need to provide this thing called facts, something they haven't been too keen recognize in the past.

The grand finale before the Lisbon courts was a complete farce, this is on public record - they humiliated themselves before the world.  What possible hope do they have with the ECHR?  If however, they are using a threat to delay finality, it will assuredly come back and bite them on the bum.  There must come a time when they inwardly admit they're scuppered by reality.

ETA: Gonçalo Amaral's got more chance of taking his case before the ECHR!

I agree with your summary and can see no credible grounds for a challenge to the Portuguese Supreme court's ruling at the ECHR. That leaves the possibility that the manoeuvre is cunning and tactical, intended to delay payment of costs and continue for as long as possible to apply pressure to Mr Amaral (in which case it's a further waste of money anyway), or simply foolish, inspired by wounded self-importance and the persuasion of lawyers ever keen to milk a cash cow. If it's the latter, it would not be the first time the Mccanns have been conned out of some of the money so generously given for the search for Madeleine. Kevin Halligen took them for several hundred thousand, Bell Pottinger for half a million, the website developer for 30,000+, and that's only what I can call to mind without looking things up.