I was emailed this information for this thread to keep forum members updated...
LATEST #J4TA1 UPDATE
Apparently according to The Football Ombudsman, Arsenal FC & The Premier League are issuing a Joint Statement in regard to The Archway One's Ban - which will be displayed on their relevant website on Friday Afternoon.
He also stated that The case of The Archway One will feature prominently in his Annual IFO Report which be will be published in the next few weeks.
It has been 4-5 months since the IFO's adjudication that the ban should be rescinded, (The Police have also agreed to a lifting of the ban,this was the advice given to Arsenal from Senior Football Intelligence Officers) in which time The Archway One has received no official communication from the club = ABSOLUTE DISGRACE!
Well let's see what happens on Friday - Fingers crossed (But I wouldn't hold my breadth!)
Justice For The Archway One Updates
-
gooner.ed
- Site Admin
- Posts: 3458
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 3:05 pm
- Location: Scotland Yard's 10 Most Wanted List
Re: Justice For The Archway One Updates
Update on the case that I have been emailed:
#J4TA1 AFC & PREMIER L IN BREACH OF IFO TERMS OF REFERENCE
Arsenal & The Premier League, have not issued as promised a joint statement, on the subject of where they failed to adhere to the Independent Football Ombudsman's recommendations on Mick’s case. This has been mentioned, in the IFO annual reportwww.theifo.co.uk (Publications) in which he says both Arsenal & The Premier league are in breach of the terms of reference of the IFO scheme. As they have not issued a statement outlining their reasons for non-compliance with the IFO's Adjudication/Recommendations.
We are as yet not aware of what penalties they both will face.
Mick has lodged his appeal under the newly instigated Arsenal appeal process; however he was not allowed a personal hearing as requested. He was merely told to email his appeal reference to the clu8b, which they will respond to in 30 days. However they have stated that they are not obliged to give any reasons for refusing the appeal. This is hardly a transparent process.
We hope for the right result, but we are not holding our breath!
Thanks for your continued support, we must keep up the pressure on Arsenal, please continue to share this to all football fans.
#J4TA1 AFC & PREMIER L IN BREACH OF IFO TERMS OF REFERENCE
Arsenal & The Premier League, have not issued as promised a joint statement, on the subject of where they failed to adhere to the Independent Football Ombudsman's recommendations on Mick’s case. This has been mentioned, in the IFO annual reportwww.theifo.co.uk (Publications) in which he says both Arsenal & The Premier league are in breach of the terms of reference of the IFO scheme. As they have not issued a statement outlining their reasons for non-compliance with the IFO's Adjudication/Recommendations.
We are as yet not aware of what penalties they both will face.
Mick has lodged his appeal under the newly instigated Arsenal appeal process; however he was not allowed a personal hearing as requested. He was merely told to email his appeal reference to the clu8b, which they will respond to in 30 days. However they have stated that they are not obliged to give any reasons for refusing the appeal. This is hardly a transparent process.
We hope for the right result, but we are not holding our breath!
Thanks for your continued support, we must keep up the pressure on Arsenal, please continue to share this to all football fans.
-
QuartzGooner
- Posts: 14474
- Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 pm
- Location: London
Re: Justice For The Archway One Updates
I was emailed this information to post on this thread:
TAKEN FROM FACEBOOK'S PAGE JUSTICE FOR THE ARCHWAY ONE PAGE (Can't attach letter)
See below the letter I received from Arsenal F.C. (Yes again IT WAS UNSIGNED!) stating that it's 3 person Appeals Panel had failed to uphold my appeal against their 5 year ban.
No reasons were provided (previously they had always cited that they were acting upon police advice - THIS TIME THEY COULD NOT AS THE POLICE ADVICE WAS FOR THEM TO ABIDE WITH THE INDEPENDENT FOOTBALL OMBUDSMAN'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BAN WAS TO BE SUSPENDED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 2015/16 SEASON !!
Even serial killers such as Charles Manson & Peter Sutcliffe are given reasons when their parole hearing decide they should not be released!
All this leads me to believe that Arsenal's newly instigated following my IFO Adjudication (Section 13 of their Charter) Appeals Process is nothing more than a SHAM. I firmly believe that no such meeting to discuss my Appeal took place. Instead Arsenal F.C. (as these people call themselves) had already decided the outcome of the Appeal as soon as they received it - it had no hearing!
THE PROPER FORMAT FOR A FAIR & TRANSPARENT APPEAL WOULD HAVE BEEN AS PERSONAL HEARING, WHERE I COULD PERSONALLY MADE MY OBSERVATIONS & ANSWERED ANY QUESTIONS.
I would now ask you all to email to voice your disapproval of the way I have been treated & denied a fair hearing, after they had ignored an Ombudsman's ruling, the Courts, the Police & Public Opinion.
THANKS FOR YOUR SUPPORT
MICK - AKA 'THE ARCHWAY ONE
TAKEN FROM FACEBOOK'S PAGE JUSTICE FOR THE ARCHWAY ONE PAGE (Can't attach letter)
See below the letter I received from Arsenal F.C. (Yes again IT WAS UNSIGNED!) stating that it's 3 person Appeals Panel had failed to uphold my appeal against their 5 year ban.
No reasons were provided (previously they had always cited that they were acting upon police advice - THIS TIME THEY COULD NOT AS THE POLICE ADVICE WAS FOR THEM TO ABIDE WITH THE INDEPENDENT FOOTBALL OMBUDSMAN'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BAN WAS TO BE SUSPENDED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 2015/16 SEASON !!
Even serial killers such as Charles Manson & Peter Sutcliffe are given reasons when their parole hearing decide they should not be released!
All this leads me to believe that Arsenal's newly instigated following my IFO Adjudication (Section 13 of their Charter) Appeals Process is nothing more than a SHAM. I firmly believe that no such meeting to discuss my Appeal took place. Instead Arsenal F.C. (as these people call themselves) had already decided the outcome of the Appeal as soon as they received it - it had no hearing!
THE PROPER FORMAT FOR A FAIR & TRANSPARENT APPEAL WOULD HAVE BEEN AS PERSONAL HEARING, WHERE I COULD PERSONALLY MADE MY OBSERVATIONS & ANSWERED ANY QUESTIONS.
I would now ask you all to email to voice your disapproval of the way I have been treated & denied a fair hearing, after they had ignored an Ombudsman's ruling, the Courts, the Police & Public Opinion.
THANKS FOR YOUR SUPPORT
MICK - AKA 'THE ARCHWAY ONE
-
QuartzGooner
- Posts: 14474
- Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 pm
- Location: London
Re: Justice For The Archway One Updates
PRESS RELEASE FROM THE CAMPAIGN
THE ARCHWAY ONE DEMANDS ANSWERS FROM ARSENAL FC FOLLOWING UNSUCESSFUL APPEAL AGAINST HIS EMIRATES STADIUM BAN
Last week Mick Doherty received notification from Arsenal FC that his appeal against a 5 year ban from The Emirates Stadium had not been allowed.
This ban was issued by the club following a request from a WPC who had failed in her application to persuade a court to serve Mr Doherty with a banning order following a non-football related public order offence in August 2013.
Mr Doherty has campaigned tirelessly ever since to get this unwarranted ban overturned (with his “Justice for The Archway One” campaign). In April 2015, following an official complaint to the Independent Football Ombudsman, the IFO returned an adjudication on his complaint which recommended that Arsenal rescind this ban at the beginning of the 2015/16 season.
In a totally unprecedented move the club refused to comply with the Ombudsman’s recommendation. The only positive result coming from the ombudsman’s report was that the club installed an appeals process (which Mr Doherty became the first to use). In any other industry the ruling of the Ombudsman is binding on all parties, however apparently not so for football clubs. This has led The Football Supporters Federation to label the IFO as “toothless” meaning football supporters have “no adequate protection”.
In refusing to allow Mr Doherty’s appeal, Arsenal have gone against the advice of the court, the police (senior officers contacted the club prior to the appeal decision notifying them that they felt the Ombudsman’s decision should be upheld as even if a banning order had been warranted – it would have been served by now), the ombudsman and the Football Supporters Federation.
The letter notifying Mr Doherty of the club’s decision was unbelievably not signed by any club official/representative instead it was ‘signed’ ‘The Arsenal Football Club’ – obviously nobody wants to be held accountable for this injustice!
Mr Doherty has now served a subject access request to Arsenal under the DPA Act 1998 (as is his legal right) demanding all documentation, minutes etc. from his appeal hearing. In any other appeal process the panel are obliged to provide reasons as to why any appeal has failed.
Mr Doherty indeed doubts that a meeting was actually held to hear his appeal, especially as he was refused a personal hearing to put his case forward, instead having to submit it by email.
Mick said “Let's find out the truth about this supposed meeting of The Arsenal Appeals Panel, at which they allegedly decided to refuse to allow my appeal against their outlandish 5 year Emirates Stadium ban against me, despite overwhelming evidence to support my appeal”.
“They have refused to supply any reasons as to why my appeal was turned down, which in itself implies some sort of foul play. Therefore I have exercised my right to request full disclosure of all documentation under the Data Protection Act 1998 regarding this alleged meeting & all correspondence which was considered prior to this decision being reached”.
“Surely if all was dealt with in the right & proper manner as it should have been - there is no reason Arsenal FC should not be able to comply with such a request”.
Mr Doherty’s legal team is to explore challenging this decision under the Human Rights Act.
physician
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 5:08 pm
Location: London
THE ARCHWAY ONE DEMANDS ANSWERS FROM ARSENAL FC FOLLOWING UNSUCESSFUL APPEAL AGAINST HIS EMIRATES STADIUM BAN
Last week Mick Doherty received notification from Arsenal FC that his appeal against a 5 year ban from The Emirates Stadium had not been allowed.
This ban was issued by the club following a request from a WPC who had failed in her application to persuade a court to serve Mr Doherty with a banning order following a non-football related public order offence in August 2013.
Mr Doherty has campaigned tirelessly ever since to get this unwarranted ban overturned (with his “Justice for The Archway One” campaign). In April 2015, following an official complaint to the Independent Football Ombudsman, the IFO returned an adjudication on his complaint which recommended that Arsenal rescind this ban at the beginning of the 2015/16 season.
In a totally unprecedented move the club refused to comply with the Ombudsman’s recommendation. The only positive result coming from the ombudsman’s report was that the club installed an appeals process (which Mr Doherty became the first to use). In any other industry the ruling of the Ombudsman is binding on all parties, however apparently not so for football clubs. This has led The Football Supporters Federation to label the IFO as “toothless” meaning football supporters have “no adequate protection”.
In refusing to allow Mr Doherty’s appeal, Arsenal have gone against the advice of the court, the police (senior officers contacted the club prior to the appeal decision notifying them that they felt the Ombudsman’s decision should be upheld as even if a banning order had been warranted – it would have been served by now), the ombudsman and the Football Supporters Federation.
The letter notifying Mr Doherty of the club’s decision was unbelievably not signed by any club official/representative instead it was ‘signed’ ‘The Arsenal Football Club’ – obviously nobody wants to be held accountable for this injustice!
Mr Doherty has now served a subject access request to Arsenal under the DPA Act 1998 (as is his legal right) demanding all documentation, minutes etc. from his appeal hearing. In any other appeal process the panel are obliged to provide reasons as to why any appeal has failed.
Mr Doherty indeed doubts that a meeting was actually held to hear his appeal, especially as he was refused a personal hearing to put his case forward, instead having to submit it by email.
Mick said “Let's find out the truth about this supposed meeting of The Arsenal Appeals Panel, at which they allegedly decided to refuse to allow my appeal against their outlandish 5 year Emirates Stadium ban against me, despite overwhelming evidence to support my appeal”.
“They have refused to supply any reasons as to why my appeal was turned down, which in itself implies some sort of foul play. Therefore I have exercised my right to request full disclosure of all documentation under the Data Protection Act 1998 regarding this alleged meeting & all correspondence which was considered prior to this decision being reached”.
“Surely if all was dealt with in the right & proper manner as it should have been - there is no reason Arsenal FC should not be able to comply with such a request”.
Mr Doherty’s legal team is to explore challenging this decision under the Human Rights Act.
physician
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 5:08 pm
Location: London
-
QuartzGooner
- Posts: 14474
- Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 pm
- Location: London
Re: Justice For The Archway One Updates
Latest update from Mick November 2015
Arsenal's response to Mick's subject access request (under The Data Protection Act)regarding the supposed Appeals Panel Meeting which failed to uphold his appeal against the Emirates Stadium ban, yielded the following information
1) Amazingly no minutes of this meeting were taken & no member of the panel made any notes!!
2) Arsenal refuse to divulge the names of any members of the Appeals Panel or of anyone in attendance!!
3) Yet again the letter is signed "The Arsenal Football Club" - Nobody is willing to put their name to this correspondence!!!
I THINK WE CAN SAFELY SAY THAT NO SUCH MEETING OF ANY SUPPOSED APPEALS PANEL EVER TOOK PLACE - YET AGAIN ARSENAL ARE GUILTY OF BARE FACED LYING........
This document will have to be referred to The Information Commissioner's Office along with a complaint that Arsenal have failed to comply with their obligations under The Data Protection Act.
Any suggestions for the next plan of attack?
physician
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 5:08 pm
Location: London
Arsenal's response to Mick's subject access request (under The Data Protection Act)regarding the supposed Appeals Panel Meeting which failed to uphold his appeal against the Emirates Stadium ban, yielded the following information
1) Amazingly no minutes of this meeting were taken & no member of the panel made any notes!!
2) Arsenal refuse to divulge the names of any members of the Appeals Panel or of anyone in attendance!!
3) Yet again the letter is signed "The Arsenal Football Club" - Nobody is willing to put their name to this correspondence!!!
I THINK WE CAN SAFELY SAY THAT NO SUCH MEETING OF ANY SUPPOSED APPEALS PANEL EVER TOOK PLACE - YET AGAIN ARSENAL ARE GUILTY OF BARE FACED LYING........
This document will have to be referred to The Information Commissioner's Office along with a complaint that Arsenal have failed to comply with their obligations under The Data Protection Act.
Any suggestions for the next plan of attack?
physician
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 5:08 pm
Location: London
-
gooner.ed
- Site Admin
- Posts: 3458
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 3:05 pm
- Location: Scotland Yard's 10 Most Wanted List
Re: Justice For The Archway One Updates
From October 13th - only just seen as was not being informed of PMs via email (which is how I know when there is an update to post)...
PRESS RELEASE
THE ARCHWAY ONE DEMANDS ANSWERS FROM ARSENAL FC FOLLOWING UNSUCESSFUL APPEAL AGAINST HIS EMIRATES STADIUM BAN
Last week Mick Doherty received notification from Arsenal FC that his appeal against a 5 year ban from The Emirates Stadium had not been allowed.
This ban was issued by the club following a request from a WPC who had failed in her application to persuade a court to serve Mr Doherty with a banning order following a non-football related public order offence in August 2013.
Mr Doherty has campaigned tirelessly ever since to get this unwarranted ban overturned (with his “Justice for The Archway One” campaign). In April 2015, following an official complaint to the Independent Football Ombudsman, the IFO returned an adjudication on his complaint which recommended that Arsenal rescind this ban at the beginning of the 2015/16 season.
In a totally unprecedented move the club refused to comply with the Ombudsman’s recommendation. The only positive result coming from the ombudsman’s report was that the club installed an appeals process (which Mr Doherty became the first to use). In any other industry the ruling of the Ombudsman is binding on all parties, however apparently not so for football clubs. This has led The Football Supporters Federation to label the IFO as “toothless” meaning football supporters have “no adequate protection”.
In refusing to allow Mr Doherty’s appeal, Arsenal have gone against the advice of the court, the police (senior officers contacted the club prior to the appeal decision notifying them that they felt the Ombudsman’s decision should be upheld as even if a banning order had been warranted – it would have been served by now), the ombudsman and the Football Supporters Federation.
The letter notifying Mr Doherty of the club’s decision was unbelievably not signed by any club official/representative instead it was ‘signed’ ‘The Arsenal Football Club’ – obviously nobody wants to be held accountable for this injustice!
Mr Doherty has now served a subject access request to Arsenal under the DPA Act 1998 (as is his legal right) demanding all documentation, minutes etc. from his appeal hearing. In any other appeal process the panel are obliged to provide reasons as to why any appeal has failed.
Mr Doherty indeed doubts that a meeting was actually held to hear his appeal, especially as he was refused a personal hearing to put his case forward, instead having to submit it by email.
Mick said “Let's find out the truth about this supposed meeting of The Arsenal Appeals Panel, at which they allegedly decided to refuse to allow my appeal against their outlandish 5 year Emirates Stadium ban against me, despite overwhelming evidence to support my appeal”.
“They have refused to supply any reasons as to why my appeal was turned down, which in itself implies some sort of foul play. Therefore I have exercised my right to request full disclosure of all documentation under the Data Protection Act 1998 regarding this alleged meeting & all correspondence which was considered prior to this decision being reached”.
“Surely if all was dealt with in the right & proper manner as it should have been - there is no reason Arsenal FC should not be able to comply with such a request”.
Mr Doherty’s legal team is to explore challenging this decision under the Human Rights Act.
PRESS RELEASE
THE ARCHWAY ONE DEMANDS ANSWERS FROM ARSENAL FC FOLLOWING UNSUCESSFUL APPEAL AGAINST HIS EMIRATES STADIUM BAN
Last week Mick Doherty received notification from Arsenal FC that his appeal against a 5 year ban from The Emirates Stadium had not been allowed.
This ban was issued by the club following a request from a WPC who had failed in her application to persuade a court to serve Mr Doherty with a banning order following a non-football related public order offence in August 2013.
Mr Doherty has campaigned tirelessly ever since to get this unwarranted ban overturned (with his “Justice for The Archway One” campaign). In April 2015, following an official complaint to the Independent Football Ombudsman, the IFO returned an adjudication on his complaint which recommended that Arsenal rescind this ban at the beginning of the 2015/16 season.
In a totally unprecedented move the club refused to comply with the Ombudsman’s recommendation. The only positive result coming from the ombudsman’s report was that the club installed an appeals process (which Mr Doherty became the first to use). In any other industry the ruling of the Ombudsman is binding on all parties, however apparently not so for football clubs. This has led The Football Supporters Federation to label the IFO as “toothless” meaning football supporters have “no adequate protection”.
In refusing to allow Mr Doherty’s appeal, Arsenal have gone against the advice of the court, the police (senior officers contacted the club prior to the appeal decision notifying them that they felt the Ombudsman’s decision should be upheld as even if a banning order had been warranted – it would have been served by now), the ombudsman and the Football Supporters Federation.
The letter notifying Mr Doherty of the club’s decision was unbelievably not signed by any club official/representative instead it was ‘signed’ ‘The Arsenal Football Club’ – obviously nobody wants to be held accountable for this injustice!
Mr Doherty has now served a subject access request to Arsenal under the DPA Act 1998 (as is his legal right) demanding all documentation, minutes etc. from his appeal hearing. In any other appeal process the panel are obliged to provide reasons as to why any appeal has failed.
Mr Doherty indeed doubts that a meeting was actually held to hear his appeal, especially as he was refused a personal hearing to put his case forward, instead having to submit it by email.
Mick said “Let's find out the truth about this supposed meeting of The Arsenal Appeals Panel, at which they allegedly decided to refuse to allow my appeal against their outlandish 5 year Emirates Stadium ban against me, despite overwhelming evidence to support my appeal”.
“They have refused to supply any reasons as to why my appeal was turned down, which in itself implies some sort of foul play. Therefore I have exercised my right to request full disclosure of all documentation under the Data Protection Act 1998 regarding this alleged meeting & all correspondence which was considered prior to this decision being reached”.
“Surely if all was dealt with in the right & proper manner as it should have been - there is no reason Arsenal FC should not be able to comply with such a request”.
Mr Doherty’s legal team is to explore challenging this decision under the Human Rights Act.
-
gooner.ed
- Site Admin
- Posts: 3458
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 3:05 pm
- Location: Scotland Yard's 10 Most Wanted List
Re: Justice For The Archway One Updates
Sent: Thu Nov 19, 2015 1:45 pm
LATEST ARCHWAY ONE UPDATE
Arsenal's response to Mick's subject access request (under The Data Protection Act)regarding the supposed Appeals Panel Meeting which failed to uphold his appeal against the Emirates Stadium ban, yielded the following information
1) Amazingly no minutes of this meeting were taken & no member of the panel made any notes!!
2) Arsenal refuse to divulge the names of any members of the Appeals Panel or of anyone in attendance!!
3) Yet again the letter is signed "The Arsenal Football Club" - Nobody is willing to put their name to this correspondence!!!
I THINK WE CAN SAFELY SAY THAT NO SUCH MEETING OF ANY SUPPOSED APPEALS PANEL EVER TOOK PLACE - YET AGAIN ARSENAL ARE GUILTY OF BARE FACED LYING........
This document will have to be referred to The Information Commissioner's Office along with a complaint that Arsenal have failed to comply with their obligations under The Data Protection Act.
LATEST ARCHWAY ONE UPDATE
Arsenal's response to Mick's subject access request (under The Data Protection Act)regarding the supposed Appeals Panel Meeting which failed to uphold his appeal against the Emirates Stadium ban, yielded the following information
1) Amazingly no minutes of this meeting were taken & no member of the panel made any notes!!
2) Arsenal refuse to divulge the names of any members of the Appeals Panel or of anyone in attendance!!
3) Yet again the letter is signed "The Arsenal Football Club" - Nobody is willing to put their name to this correspondence!!!
I THINK WE CAN SAFELY SAY THAT NO SUCH MEETING OF ANY SUPPOSED APPEALS PANEL EVER TOOK PLACE - YET AGAIN ARSENAL ARE GUILTY OF BARE FACED LYING........
This document will have to be referred to The Information Commissioner's Office along with a complaint that Arsenal have failed to comply with their obligations under The Data Protection Act.
