Public and private bodies have a duty to keep us safe from harm and protect our lives, but every year hundreds of people die preventable deaths in state custody or care. These include deaths of people in police and prison custody, mental health settings and following disasters including at Grenfell and Hillsborough. In response, the public and bereaved families need transparency, accountability and action, so that changes are made to protect us and our families and prevent future deaths. Hundreds of vital recommendations are made following inquests and inquiries. Yet there is no system in place to oversee them or ensure changes are made. Potentially life-saving recommendations are too often forgotten, dismissed or simply not implemented. This leads to yet more preventable deaths and harms. The current gap in the system has serious implications for bereaved families. It also undermines public trust in the UK’s investigatory framework and has a significant human and financial cost. Support INQUEST and the bereaved families standing alongside us in calling for this change, to help protect lives. "The only thing that makes sense of the loss of your loved one is that maybe lessons will be learned and the same thing will not happen to someone else." - Andy McCulloch, father of Colette McCulloch

The 20 years rule allows a legal route for those who have lived in the UK continuously for 20 years. The rule does not grant them immediate indefinite leave to remain at the end of the 20 years but to start another 10 years process after which they can then apply for indefinite leave to remain. Those affected mainly are people that are termed overstayers. If you take 30 years in total out of the active period of an individual's life what do they have left? An applicant at 40 would be in this cage until they are 70! So many have lost touch with the families they left behind in their originating countries. Some have died while waiting out the first 20 years. A lot have gone mentally sick, depressed and even committed suicide or have gone sucidal because of being stagnant for such a long time. Marriages have been broken or severely damaged and deaths of loved ones experienced by the long separation caused to mention a few. If this inhumane rule is reviewed and changed to just a few years, applicants would still have much useful years and be able to move on with their lives. Also there would be a great reduction in the number of people that are overstayers. The wicked rule is clearly a form of modernised slavery being encouraged by the UK government. Sadly, the UK government is in this matter considered to be guilty of destroying the social, mental and economic wellbeing of these individuals. However, the government in addition to reducing the 30 years, can give the overstayers limited opportunity to work and pay tax while they are being restricted from having access to certain public funds; the government would then have a better statistics of the population, who pays tax and who contributes to the National Insurance. This is the time to act because the UK government has for a long time been infringing upon the people's Human Rights by this rule that has kept changing. The first part used to be 10 years as at about 2000, then it was increased to 14 years and now, 20years! This is evil and UK is toying with people's lives unduly. This 20 years UK long residence Immigration Rule is rigid, heartless, unempathetic, tyranny and oppression against human beings particularly to other ethnic community background and their relatives.

Because many patients are being threatened with removal or are removed from GP patient lists often following formal or complaints. Many surgeries operate Kangaroo Courts that become Judge and Jury without ever meeting with the patient or discussing the matter. Individual GP Complaints Policies and NHS Complaints policies are being ignored or significantly breached with little or no come-back for the patient(s).

We believe that people seeking protection from war and persecution should be welcomed and that everyone’s claim for asylum should be treated equally and fairly. We believe that the UK should offer sanctuary to those who need it and we oppose laws which criminalise refugees. We defend the right of people to seek safety from war and persecution in the UK. We believe it is necessary to speak out against attempts to punish those who make their own way to safety. We reject anti-refugee laws which will risk the lives and well-being of people and we support a refugee protection system that treats all people with dignity and compassion.

Victims do not choose to become victims. They become one. They are already dealing with trauma and fear for their own safety, so it is critical that they have equal rights in court. The current justice system in Scotland appears to protect the perpetrator more than the victim. The good news is that Scotland is now working on criminal justice reform, and the new bill has recently been published. However, having Victims Commissioners is not enough. Victims need to be defended by lawyers too. Why is it essential to provide solicitors for victims? Here some points: Numerous cases of domestic abuse and harassment are dismissed for lack of evidence. Prior to trials, however, the Crown Office never hears the victims' story, to check if there is any extra evidence or witnesses that could be added to the case. No one ever inquires about their emotional, psychological, or even financial consequences that they face (for example, some stalker victims may struggle to hold a job). Often, a clear picture of the damage is not fully portrayed in court. Therefore, a lawyer has the potential to alter the game. Someone who contacts victims following the police report and advocates on their behalf thereafter. They will collect additional information and evidence to provide to the Crown Office so that they can make a more informed judgement regarding whether or not to continue the prosecution. A lawyer will also provide victims with information about the legal process, what to expect, and their rights (such as the right to request a review) and advise them on the most effective strategy to move their case forward. Victims are required to appear in court as witnesses, but they are not required to have legal representation because they have been called to court "just to share their story." However, this is incorrect. A distinction should exist between a victim and a witness. Victims are those who have suffered as a result of abuse (of any kind), and the situation has had a greater negative impact on their lives, whereas an ordinary witness may not necessarily be emotionally invested in the story. This indicates that there is no appropriate support in place for victims. They should be treated as victims until the contrary is confirmed. Their wellbeing should be safeguarded, and an attorney could assist with that. Due to the psychological pressure survivors experience in court, they may be unable to fully articulate themselves. The experience is overwhelming. No one really prepared the victims for the experience. For the very first time, they share their story in front of the judge. Perpetrators, on the other hand, have their stories heard, they are prepared for the experience and they also have an opportunity to prepare their defence with the assistance of their attorneys. Sharing a traumatic experience is never simple, especially in a courtroom, and it can be especially intimidating for women to do so in a room full of men. A lawyer with prior knowledge of the case could also encourage the victims to tell the complete story and make the process easier for them on an emotional level. Abusers have the right to an attorney who gets paid to manipulate the truth. The abuser's attorney is permitted to victim-blame and accuse survivors of wrongdoing in order to portray them as immoral while defending their clients' innocence. Furthermore, they are permitted to discriminate (especially against women) and adopt an inappropriate attitude and line of questioning to prove their client's innocence. While, in the other hand, there is no one to advocate for the victims' right. This is especially problematic in jury trials, where charismatic attorneys may convince jurors that their clients are blameless by leading them to misinterpret the evidence. If perpetrators' solicitors are permitted to have such conduct, then the victims' legal representation must be equally robust in order to give victims' stories the appropriate weight too. This will balance the rights from each party. Additionally, for how the system stands now, victims may experience additional psychological or emotional trauma in court. A victim's attorney will advocate for victims' rights in court, to prevent further traumatization, and put an end to victim-blaming and discrimination. Many victims suffer from PTSD after experiencing court and this needs to end. Since victims are only required to appear as witnesses, they do not have the right to hear all the evidence presented in court. The crime is not "their case" but rather the case of the Crown Office. On the other hand, abusers have the right to access all court-presented evidence. Providing victims with solicitors will ensure that they have equal access to information. For the same principles, victims have not right to appeal for the judge's decision while abusers can. Having an attorney ensures that victims will have the same rights. The victims' attorney could also assist them in pursuing monetary compensation. In many cases, such as stalking, victims have an economic impact. For example, if their work performance declines and end up losing their job. Because they did not choose to be victims, victims should also be eligible for compensation. In conclusion, as highlighted above, in the courtroom the power dynamic is unbalanced -abusers have more rights than victims. Mandating solicitors for victims could be a game-changer and also play an essential role in preventing violence. Victims must have someone to argue their case and advocate for their rights. For yourself, for our daughters, mothers, sisters, nieces, grandmothers, and all other victims of abuse and stalking regardless of gender. I stand by your side. For a fairer Scotland. And I hope you will stand by our side too.

Freedom of Speech & Human Rights Petition We have the right to come together with others and peacefully express our views. Authorities must allow us to take part in marches, protests and demonstrations. Have the ability of saving our Freedom of Speech and Right to Protest.

Gabon is one of the remaining bastions of forest elephant with 85% of the forest elephant population . Poor financial compensation and grants support are a significant cause of poverty and migration in cities from rural areas. In turn this leads to native people being unable to sustain their way of life and keep their families together Villagers are abandoning theirs traditions, their cultures and their way of life. This is a huge loss for native Gabonese.

The Windrush scandal continues to cause pain and suffering to Black people across the country. As we approach the 75th anniversary of the arrival of the Empire Windrush, which should be a time of celebration, Black people are again facing a hostile government. Reports that ministers’ promises to implement key recommendations from the Independent review into the scandal look set to be ditched, will come as yet another devastating blow to the Windrush generation. As Home Secretary, you have the opportunity to show that the Government is serious about righting past wrongs by honouring the recommendations set out in the independent Williams report. To do anything less sends out the clear message that the suffering of the Windrush generation was in vain and that the hostile environment still exists.

The Government’s new Public Order Bill would allow police to put innocent people on electronic ankle tags and ban them from attending marches and demonstrations. Campaigners and people who want to attend a protest need not have ever committed any offence in order to be given a so-called “protest banning order” by the police. Under this new anti-protest law, the police will be given powers to monitor campaigners using electronic GPS tags, restrict their internet activities and prevent them from attending protests. These are some of the most disturbing and anti-democratic police powers introduced in the UK for decades. After the shocking police behaviour towards grieving women at the Clapham vigil for Sarah Everard, we fear these ankle tags could entail serious abuse. There is no place for police monitoring and oppression of people simply campaigning for change. These extreme police powers would be controversial in Russia and China – we cannot allow them in a democratic country like the UK. If thousands of us sign this petition, we can make Suella Braverman and Rishi Sunak drop these dangerous new powers.

Exeter has a proud culture of welcoming new arrivals, and we believe our diversity makes our city stronger and more vibrant. We’re calling on the U.K. Government to drop this discriminatory and inhumane policy completely, and particularly for LGBTQI+ people.

Isle of Skye does not have a lot of spaces available for old people to be cared for. At the moment Home Farm has 17 residents and if the 15 residents from Budhmor are homed there it will leave only space for 3 more residents from the whole island. The staff are being made redundant at a time when the economy on the island is at an all time low.

Chinese state-owned companies Hikvision and Dahua are used to monitor, control and oppress ethnic minorities in China. Their cameras watch over 1 million people held in concentration camps and every corner of the Xinjiang province, with high-tech features such as facial recognition, behavioural analysis and "Uyghur alerts" to flag the province's ethnic minorities to the authorities. And these surveillance companies are not only spying on ethnic minorities in China - almost all of us in the UK are being watched by Hikvision and Dahua CCTV cameras every day. Big Brother Watch's investigation has revealed that Hikvision dominates the UK's CCTV networks - over 60% of public bodies, from schools to councils, are using either Hikvision, or to a lesser degree, Dahua cameras. Their intrusive, advanced surveillance capabilities are being quietly normalised in the UK. That means not only is our privacy and security at risk in an increasingly dystopian surveillance state - but British taxpayers' money is funding companies implicated in genocide and modern slavery in China. The USA has already banned Hikvision and Dahua. With enough public pressure on the Government, the UK can and should ban Hikvision too. Tell Rishi Sunak to #BanHikvision and #BanDahua now!