They argue that physical punishment can have long-term negative effects on a child’s development and is an ineffective form of discipline.

Current legislation allows for parents to use ‘reasonable punishment’ which includes smacking within the home as long as it doesn’t result in injury to the person being punished (visible bruises, grazes, scratches, swelling or cuts). Since these rules were implemented in 2004, numerous reviews of the laws have been made but so far, no changes have occurred.

Consequences of Smacking

Unfortunately, there is no definitive proof that smacking children leads to long term negative effects in children. Much of the articles written regarding the matter are based on studies where a link can be found, but no solid connection can be made. Therefore, much of the arguments being put forward by psychologists, teachers and parents is merely opinion. Whilst there is no doubt that the psychological experts probably have a good idea what the long-term effects of smacking a child could be, it appears that each case is unique as all children behave and respond differently to each other.

The other issue with the smacking debate is that there are conflicting reports/research papers that state smacking as both beneficial and detrimental to children.

In 1997, Marjorie Gunnoe, professor of psychology at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan conducted research on 179 teenagers about how often they were smacked as children. The results showed that children smacked up to the age of six did better at school and were more optimistic about their lives than those that didn’t. They were also more likely to undertake voluntary work and keener to attend university. Once they moved beyond this age range, the results started to line up a little bit more with the general consensus. Children aged seven to eleven who were smacked still fared well in terms of scholastic success, however they also appeared to get into more fights than those that didn’t. Those who were smacked beyond the age of eleven seemed to fare poorly across the board.

By contrast, in 2017 a study was carried out by researchers from the University of Manitoba, the University of Michigan, the University of Texas, and the Centres for Disease Control in the US. The researchers found people who said they’d been smacked as children were more likely to report having problems like symptoms of depression, drinking moderate or heavy amounts of alcohol, and taking drugs. But because of the nature of this study, a cause and effect relationship hasn’t been proven, no matter how plausible the link might seem.

The research is inconclusive…. But we know better

By ‘we’, I mean the public by and large. Recent research has shown that the physical correction of children is in decline in almost every Western country. Parents have been exploring alternatives to smacking their children for quite some time and some of the popular ones include:

Time Out – removing a child from a situation in which they are instigating inappropriate behaviour for a certain amount of time. Often an explanation and/or apology is required before a Time Out can end.

The Naughty Step – requiring a child to sit on a particular step (or rug, or mat, etc.) while they reflect on their inappropriate behaviour. Again, an explanation and/or apology are often required before the child is allowed off the Naughty Step.

Grounding – prohibiting a child from attending social events or from engaging in particular activities. This technique may also incorporate tasks or chores which must be carried out instead and are designed to teach children appropriate behaviour.

Taking Away Privileges – prohibiting a child from taking advantage of certain privileges (usually those that they have earlier abused with inappropriate behaviour). Privileges are usually restored when a child can prove, through his/her behaviour, that (s)he understands and appreciates them.

So, can we smack children?

As it stands, it is still legal to smack your child as a form of discipline, as long as they don’t receive any physical injury. Many people I have spoken to over the years have said that they were smacked as children and they’ve grown up fine, which is an understandable reason for people to continue with that method of discipline. On a personal note, I too agree that smacking never taught me to be violent or exert physical pain to people who annoy me or aren’t doing as I want. It taught me to respect my elders and others, it taught me about actions and consequences and perhaps, because I came from a loving home, it never led into realms of depression, heavy drinking or drug dependency.

But as I stated earlier, each child is different. What may work for one child might not work for another and eventually, the only option left is a quick smack on the bum. Overall, if a parent relies on smacking in the first instance, then the likelihood is that it would be detrimental to the child’s wellbeing as they would feel they get a beating for everything they do, however as a last resort, it would be understandable for a parent to use smacking to discipline their child.

*Please note that Ambipro neither condones nor disapproves of smacking children and believes the decision belongs to the parent and the parent alone.

The post To Smack or not to Smack appeared first on Ambipro.

Sadly, as with many things in the press, all is not what it seems. Unbeknownst to many westerners is that there are many more liberal interpretations of Sharia Law that never make the headlines.

Sharia Law

Sharia in Arabic means “the way,” and does not refer to a body of law. Sharia is more accurately understood as referring to wide-ranging moral and broad ethical principles drawn from the Qurans teachings and other associated religious texts known as the Hadith. As the law is drawn from religion, it has no international border as it is respected by all the followers of Islam across the world.

Because of this, the British Government has allowed a small number of Muslim Arbitration Tribunals to allow Muslim communities to resolve certain issues in accordance to their faith. It is worth bearing in mind though that despite what certain factions of the political class imply, Muslim Arbitration Tribunals (or Sharia Courts as certain fearmongers like to call them) must act within the realms of English Law, meaning things like lashing and beheading could never occur on British soil.

So how does it work?

Whilst Muslim Arbitration Tribunals can pass judgement on a case, it must also be signed off by the English Courts. Whilst both parties are free to agree how their disputes are resolved, they are only subject to such safeguards as are necessary in the public interest. This means that whilst both parties can grant a sharia court the legal authority in a matter, English courts can still overrule the decision if they feel it does not comply or work within the values of English Law.

Luckily, Muslim Arbitration Tribunals are a regulated body which allows for a better record to be kept of Muslim disputes as well as being able to monitor the decisions made by them. This is certainly more beneficial than the unregulated Muslim Councils or Imams that many turned to before their creation. That’s not to say that all councils or Imams are bad or made bad decisions when they were called upon, it’s just that now we have more transparency which helps prevent the misrepresentation of sharia in the UK from occurring.

But what about all the bad bits?

The legal rulings that come from the interpretation of Sharia Law is generally referred to as Islamic Law or ‘fiqh’. As it is the result of human intellectual activity it has a slight weakness in that the results can be different depending on who is interpreting the law. This goes some way to explaining the more extremes interpretations that can manifest within certain communities and countries, especially when it becomes intertwined with politics.

Sharia ultimately provides guidance on how to live an ethical life. It requires Muslims to be just and fair with everyone. It advises on how to pray and treat others, including those in need. Muslim scholars have said that the laws derived from it must always protect life, intellect, family, property and the honour of human beings. These five points essentially make up what we could consider to be a premodern Islamic Bill of Rights, providing protection for civil liberties.

The post Sharia Law in the UK appeared first on Ambipro.

Much like how we measure our IQ (Intelligence Quotient) to see how clever a person is, Emotional Intelligence works in a similar fashion, but it focuses on of an individual’s abilities to recognise and manage their emotions, and the emotions of other people, both individually and in groups.

EI is generally made up of 5 core components:

Self-awareness – the ability to recognise and understand your moods and emotions, and how they affect others

Self-regulation – the ability to control impulses and moods, and to think before acting

Internal (or intrinsic) motivation – being driven to pursue goals for personal reasons, rather than for some kind of reward (the opposite is external motivation)

Empathy – the ability to recognise and understand others’ motivations, which is essential for building and leading teams successfully

Social skills – the ability to manage relationships and build networks

Having a high level of emotional intelligence can help progress your career too as many employer’s value an employee’s EI over their IQ. It also helps employers assess an employee’s leadership potential.

Travis Bradberry, author of Emotional Intelligence 2.0, said when writing for Forbes in 2014 that “Of all the people we’ve studied at work, we’ve found that 90% of top performers are also high in emotional intelligence. On the flip side, just 20% of bottom performers are high in emotional intelligence. You can be a top performer without emotional intelligence, but the chances are slim.”

Having a higher EI also indicates that an employee has a better ability to motivate themselves which improves their productivity, self confidence and ability to reach career goals. People with a high level of EI also typically show a more positive outlook on life and a can-do attitude. They are able to identify and empathise with other people’s opinions which is extremely useful for resolving workplace conflicts.

The post Emotional Intelligence is a desired skill nowadays, but what is it? appeared first on Ambipro.

Like many industries, the legal sector is now beginning to see the creep of technological advancement finding it ways into law firms. The main change we are seeing is the introduction of Artificial Intelligence (AI) which is transforming how the profession operates. The main idea of the introduction of AI is to free up human time to deal with more pressing or important issues.

What is AI?

AI is the computerisation of basic functions of the human mind that allow computers to undertake tasks that would typically require human intelligence. This is usually done through machine learning in which algorithms are used to analyse data, spot trends or patterns and gain knowledge from their interactions.
The applications of this machine learning are going to have a major effect on the way in which the legal sector operates in the future. Below we are going to look at some of the aspects of the legal sector that could be improved by this transformation.

Predicting Legal Outcomes

Various studies have taken place using AI to predict the outcomes of court cases. In 2016, an AI method developed by researchers at UCL, the University of Sheffield and the University of Pennsylvania successfully predicted the outcome of 79% of the judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights.
Whilst there are no plans to replace judges or lawyers with this tech, it would be helpful for lawyers in that they could use the AI to search through numerous similar court cases to establish the probability of winning in court or whether it is worth going to court at all.

Improve Documentation & Legal Research

In a 2018 study by professors at Duke Law, University of Southern California, and Stanford Law School, legal Ai had a 94% accuracy rate compared to 85% for humans when reviewing legal documents. In addition, the Ai averaged 26 seconds to complete the task whereas their human counterparts took an average of 92 minutes.
The benefit of applying Ai to these areas is that not only does Ai do the job considerably faster, it will remove the monotony of a human being sifting through pages and pages of documents. AI would highlight only docs that require a human review whilst dealing with those that it recognises as necessary.

Divorce

Court managers have disclosed that four out of 10 people who fill in divorce application forms without the help of a lawyer have their request for the divorce process to begin rejected because they cannot complete the form correctly. A recent government initiative in 2018 saw the UK’s Ministry of Justice roll out digital divorces across England and Wales. This simplified service has reduced the number of rejected application by 95% and has seen 91% of its users satisfied with the service.
Whilst the online portal has simplified the process of filing for divorce, future AI applications could see AI advising divorcees on some of the finer points of divorce that the current simplified system cannot portray.

By Runo Ahmed

Senior Legal Recruitment Specialist at Ambipro

The post Law Firms & AI – Technological Transformations appeared first on Ambipro.

Sadly though, it’s not always the case that companies can just give pay rises out at will so what can you do as a company to help retain your staff and make them feel valued without necessarily giving them a pay rise?

Develop Employees

If your staff members are doing a very repetitive job, it’s not surprising if they get bored. Consider adding additional responsibilities to your employee. This will help them grow, develop and build confidence. The additional skill sets will help add value to them as an employee as well as bolstering their CV credentials. Adding a bit of variety stops them growing bored and looking for something better somewhere else.

Play to you employee’s strengths, if they are creative, see what creative responsibilities they could undertake. Likewise, if they like solving problems, get them to look at some issues affecting the company that they might be able to help solve. This not only shows that you take interest in your employee’s skills, but you also want to develop them as a person.

Improve benefits

This can several forms but ultimately shows the employee that you want to help reward them for their hard work. Additional benefits could include extra holiday, a voucher for dinner or flexible working hours.

You could also supplement their salary through workplace benefits such as health insurance or gym memberships. Whilst you may not be able to give them more money, you can certainly help them save some which means what they do have will go further.

Transparency about the bigger picture

In order to help the employees, make a difference through their work and help shape the company, being transparent and honest can really help. Telling staff about the ‘bigger picture’ will help make them feel valued and part of the team rather than human capital.

This also applies to big company news, whether it be good or bad. Being honest means that you can celebrate the good times together and console each other when it’s bad. Poor communication or keeping secrets from staff can diminish their level of trust in you.

Let their voices be heard

Employees feel appreciated when they able to voice their opinion and be heard. If we have hired them to do a specific role, they may actually have some good ideas on how to improve the process. Whilst every idea cannot always be actioned, the act of allowing staff to speak will build their confidence and help them to begin thinking outside the box when it comes to improving company processes. They may only be small improvements but over time they can improve the workflow of your business.

Say Thankyou

It’s probably the simplest one of them all. Many employees become unhappy because they feel underappreciated. Having a positive culture and workplace environment helps a lot, it encourages communication and engagement across the board.

Thanking staff, be it in private or on the office floor, will motivate staff whilst also showing them that you do appreciate all the work they have done. Whilst the act itself costs nothing, congratulating someone for a job well done compensates people in the form of social currency, which can be highly valued in the workplace.

The post How to Keep Your Staff Happy Without a Raise appeared first on Ambipro.

Apartheid

First, we need to understand what Apartheid was to be able to get a perspective of what drove Mandela to fight his fight. Before the apartheid began in 1948, South Africa already had segregation of black & coloured people within society.

When the National Party came to power in 1948 they began to implement apartheid. Despite segregation already occurring, apartheid called for the separate development of the different racial groups in South Africa. On paper it appeared to call for equal development and freedom of cultural expression, but the way it was implemented made this impossible. Apartheid made laws forced the different racial groups to live separately and develop separately, and grossly unequally too.

The main difference between segregation and apartheid is that apartheid made segregation part of the law, it forcibly separated people with fierce repercussions for those that did not obey.

Various acts were introduced over the next few years including the Population Registration Act, the Group Areas Act and the Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Act which meant that people were recorded by the ethnic groups and many were forced to live outside of towns and cities.

They could not own property here, only rent it, as the land could only be white owned. This Act caused much hardship and resentment. People lost their homes, were moved off land they had owned for many years and were moved to undeveloped areas far away from their place of work.

Nelson Mandela

Born on July 18th, 1918, Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, he was the son of Chief Henry Mandela of the Madiba Clan of the Xhosa-speaking Tembu people. After his father’s death, young Nelson was raised by Jongintaba, the regent of the Tembu. Nelson renounced his claim to the chieftainship to become a lawyer.

Mandela established South Africa’s first black law practice, specializing in cases resulting from the post-1948 apartheid legislation. In the same year, Mandela began campaigning against South Africa’s pass laws, which required non-whites to carry documents authorising their presence in areas that the government deemed “restricted”. In 1955 he was involved in drafting the Freedom Charter, a document calling for non-racial social democracy in South Africa.

Due to his activism he was frequently targeted by the authorities. His travel was often restricted, as was his ability to talk to and liaise with other anti-apartheid activists. The government also tried to charge him with treason in 1956 but was acquitted in 1961.

Mandela abandoned his non-violent approach after the massacre of unarmed black South Africans by police forces at Sharpeville in 1960. He began advocating acts of sabotage against the regime and went underground. During this time he founded the Umkhonto we Sizwe (“Spear of the Nation”), the military wing of the ANC. In 1962 he went to Algeria for training in guerrilla warfare and sabotage. Shortly after his return he was arrested and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment.

During his time in prison, Mandela was tried for sabotage, treason, and violent conspiracy in the now infamous Rivonia Trial. A police raid at the groups headquarters had recovered a cache of arms and equipment. Whilst Mandela admitted some of the charges against him, he made a speech from the dock that was a classic defence of liberty and defiance of tyranny. The speech resonated around the world and gain international attention. On June 12, 1964, he was sentenced to life imprisonment, narrowly escaping the death penalty.

During his 26 years in prison, Mandela was moved around a lot and was offered several opportunities to be freed which he refused. Some offers involved him residing in Transkei Bantustan, an area set aside for the Xhosa-speaking peoples who had lost their South African citizenship under the apartheid system of racial separation. An offer made in 1985 required that he renounce the use of violence. Mandela refused both offers, the second on the premise that only free men were able to engage in such negotiations and, as a prisoner, he was not a free man.

During his imprisonment, Mandela received widespread support from the South African black community as well as international communities that opposed apartheid. After 1983, South Africa’s political situation deteriorated and in 1988 he engaged with the government in exploratory negotiations. In 1989 he met with the new president, Frederik Willem de Klerk and on February 11th 1990 Mandela was released.

Shortly after, Mandela was chosen as deputy president of the ANC (The political group he began his activist program with). In 1991 he became the President of the party and led the ANC in negotiations with de Klerk to end apartheid and bring about a peaceful transition to a non-racial democracy in South Africa.

In 1994, Mandela won South Africa’s first elections by universal suffrage and was sworn in as president of the country’s first multi-ethnic government. During his 5-year reign, Mandela worked hard to improve the living standards of the country’s black populace and investigated human rights violations under apartheid. In 1996 he oversaw the enactment of a new democratic constitution.

Mandela only served one term as president before retiring from politics but remained an advocate for peace, reconciliation, and social justice.

The post Mandela & Apartheid appeared first on Ambipro.

The fear of the number 13 has also spawned a new word; triskaidekaphobia (the fear of the number 13). It’s been the source of inspiration behind novels, movies and songs and will no doubt be around for years to come. Here we are going to look at a few possible origin stories of Friday 13th.

Biblical

According to biblical tradition, 13 guests attended the Last Supper, held on Maundy Thursday, including Jesus and his 12 apostles (one of whom, Judas, betrayed him). The next day, of course, was Good Friday, the day of Jesus’ crucifixion.
Can you guess who the Thirteenth guest was? That’s right, Judas Iscariot. As a result of this, a longstanding Christian superstition arose that having 13 guests at a table was a bad omen, it was courting death.
The link to Friday being a bad day is a little less clear however Jesus was crucified on a Friday, Adam supposedly gave Eve the forbidden fruit on a Friday and it is also supposedly the day the Cain killed Abel.

Knights Templar

The Knights Templar were a powerful military order of the Christian Empire, also known as the Order of Solomon’s Temple they became recognised in 1139. They are credited with creating the first banking systems and amassed immense wealth through banking and protecting wealthy religious folks on their pilgrimages.
On Friday, October 13th, 1307, King Philip of France ordered the arrest of the Knights Templar and subsequent execution of many of its members after being tortured into giving false confessions.
The motives of King Philip will never fully be known but the fact he was deeply in debt to them whilst also being slightly distrusting of the secretive ways give a pretty clear indicator of what drove him to decide to imprison them all.
Many were burned at the stake and the order was eventually disbanded in 1312 by Pope Clement under pressure from King Philip.

The Babylonians

The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian code of law of ancient Mesopotamia, dated back to about 1754 BC. It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world. The sixth Babylonian king, Hammurabi, enacted the code. A partial copy exists on a 2.25 metre stone stele. It consists of 282 laws but omits the thirteenth law. Superstitious people sometimes point to this as proof of 13’s longstanding negative associations.

The post Friday 13th – Unlucky for Some appeared first on Ambipro.

Unsurprisingly it was a rather dull affair as both teams had qualified and both put out their ‘B’ team to ensure that the better players were well rested for the knock out stages. In typical English style, we lost 1-0 with many critics arguing we were losing our winning momentum. Some would put this down to complacency. We were through so why try harder? Why risk injuries?

These are valid points but if England were to lose their first knockout game (which would be that big a shock), many would look back at this game and say the team were too complacent and so let their guard down and didn’t try as hard as they could have. Had we played the last group game to win, we would have kept the momentum and the winning feeling going, ensuring everyone was fired up for the knock out game.

Of course, we won’t know this until it comes to pass but the point is there, and it wouldn’t be the first time a team has lost a game of football due to complacency.
But complacency isn’t confined to the football pitch. In the office, staff can become complacent in their roles. Office complacency can occur for a variety of reasons however they are generally rooted in the belief that the company is already leading the way without putting in the effort to make sure it is.

Complacency can also occur if work is repetitive or continually unchallenging. It can happen without staff realising it and can seriously impact productivity.

What Signs Are There?

• Staff disengagement
• Less Initiative being taken
• Loss of passion
• No self-investment
• Reduction in risk taking
• Loss of motivation

Complacency can manifest itself in other ways however they will generally follow a similar pattern to the ones listed. But don’t worry, there are several ways you can motivate your staff to reduce complacency and boost productivity.

• Incentivise
• Spruce up the office
• Move desks around
• Improve training opportunities
• Create initiatives
• Create a sense of urgency.

The key is to start getting your staff to engage again, to take pride in their work and their career path. Enhancing your company culture with a combination of team building and employee empowerment will boost productivity and help reduce complacency.

The post Counting the Cost of Complacency appeared first on Ambipro.

Or so says article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. But just how applicable is this and what, if any, limitations are there? The convention itself does go further to explain that freedom of expression comes with responsibilities and a few caveats which we’ll take a look at.

Offensive Speech

Just because you find it offensive doesn’t mean it can’t be said. The beauty of a democracy like the one we see in the UK is that everyone is allowed to speak their mind and view their opinions on a matter. Free expression applies not just to ideas that people like, but also to ideas which offend, shock or disturb.

That’s not say that we can all walk around and say absolutely anything we want to other people though. If what you are saying could be perceived to incite violence towards another group of people or an individual, then the government are within their rights to prevent you from saying it. This can apply to an array of characteristics including religious beliefs, sexual persuasion and race which are protected under law.

Public Interest

Freedom of speech doesn’t only apply to individuals, it’s also applicable to the press who’s job it is to inform the public of stories in the national interest. This can include political news, local news and celebrity news to name a few. Again, that’s not to say that they can write anything they want. If they write anything that could incite hatred, they can be prevented from writing it. There are also a few other areas where the courts can step in and prevent the media reporting.

A good example would be court cases involving young children. Under section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, in relation to any court proceedings, other than criminal proceedings, a judge may give a direction prohibiting the publication of the name or details which would lead to the identification of a child or young person involved. These reporting restrictions exist to protect the privacy of vulnerable young people.

Likewise, if the story the paper wants to publish has no public interest whatsoever, the subject can request the courts to block it. A good example being a famous person engaging in a private sexual encounter in the privacy of their own home. Matters like this have already been blocked by the courts as “There is no public interest… in publishing kiss-and-tell stories… simply because the persons involved are well-known; and so there is no right to invade privacy by publishing them”. Coincidentally, the Convention on Human Rights also protects an individuals right to privacy and family life.

The post Is Freedom of Speech Really Free? appeared first on Ambipro.

Christabel Pankhurst

We’ll start off with one close to British hearts. Christabel Pankhurst, one of the Pankhurst sisters behind the suffragette movement to give women the vote, spat at a police officer on 13 October 1905 which led to her being arrested, along with Annie Kenny for disorderly behaviour in the street, obstructing the foot and carriage way in South-street and in the case of Christabel, assaulting the police.

Why did she do this? Despite numerous attempts to get ministers to discuss the subject of votes for women, the matter was always ignored or overlooked. Fed up of being ignored, Pankhurst interrupted a Liberal Party meeting by shouting demands for voting rights for women. As the women were being accosted by the police, Christabel came to the realisation that the only way that she would get her voice heard was to be arrested. This way, when she eventually got her day in court, the press would report every word she said. The result was a swelling of the ranks of the WSPU (Women’s Social and Political Movement) and the rest is history.

Christabel and many other members of the WSPU were arrested over the coming years, each time as an act of protest against the establishment ignoring votes for women. Despite some of the more extreme acts committed by the women such as arson and bombings, the WSPU and the Suffragette movement are celebrated for gaining women the right to vote.

Mohandas Gandhi

Revered the world over for his nonviolent philosophy of passive resistance, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was known to his many followers as Mahatma, or “the great-souled one.” Prior to his political activism, Ghandi spent nearly 20 years working in South Africa and was appalled by the discrimination he experienced as an Indian immigrant. The turning point being an incident where he was thrown out of a first-class railway compartment and beaten up by a white stagecoach driver after refusing to give up his seat for a European passenger.

His first taste of protesting began in South Africa. In 1906, after the Transvaal government passed an ordinance regarding the registration of its Indian population, Gandhi led a campaign of civil disobedience that would last for the next eight years. This eventually led to the South African Government to reach a compromise which included important concessions such as the recognition of Indian marriages and the abolition of the existing poll tax for Indians.

Gandhi was first imprisoned in 1922 for civil disobedience and sedition after a protest march turned violent and resulted in the deaths of 22 people. The incident deeply affected Gandhi, who called it a “divine warning’. He was released from prison after serving 5 years of his 6-year sentence and went on to become the most famous advocate of peaceful protest and campaigning in the world.

Gandhi famously led Indians in challenging the British-imposed salt tax with the 400 km Dandi Salt March in 1930, for which he was imprisoned for a year without trial, and later lead the Quit India Movement, calling for Britain’s withdrawal. He was arrested many times but never gave up. An advocate until the end, Gandhi sadly paid for his beliefs with his life when he was assassinated by a militant nationalist in 1948.

Rosa Parks

A few may know of the bravery Rosa Parks showed on December 1st, 1955. In the midst of the racial tension surrounding African-American citizens in the mid-20th century, 42-year-old Rosa Parks was commuting home from a long day of work at the Montgomery Fair department store by bus. Black residents of Montgomery often avoided municipal buses if possible because they found the Negroes-in-back policy so demeaning. Sadly, most of the bus users on a typical day were black and, on this day, so too was Rosa Parks.

Segregation was written into law; the front of a Montgomery bus was reserved for white citizens, and the seats behind them for black citizens. At one point during the route on that fateful day, a white man had nowhere to sit because all the seats in the designated “white” section were taken.

The driver told the riders in the four seats of the first row of the “coloured” section to stand, in effect adding another row to the “white” section. The three others obeyed. Parks did not.
“People always say that I didn’t give up my seat because I was tired,” wrote Parks in her autobiography, “but that isn’t true. I was not tired physically… No, the only tired I was, was tired of giving in.”

Eventually, two police officers approached the stopped bus, assessed the situation and arrested Rosa for violating segregation laws. This resulted in Rosa being fired from her job and it caused absolute outrage both inside and outside of the civil rights community, leading to a bus boycott led by Martin Luther King. After a year, the boycott successfully made bus segregation unconstitutional and paved the way for later victories of the civil rights campaign. Rosa Parks was a brave and passionate woman who changed the world and became a respected and much loved national symbol of the civil rights movement.

Martin Luther King

Martin Luther King had a seismic impact on race relations in the United States, as the face of the Civil-Rights movement in the 1950’s. King sought equality and human rights for African Americans, the economically disadvantaged and all victims of injustice through peaceful protest. Through his activism, he played a pivotal role in ending the legal segregation of African-American citizens, as well as the creation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. King received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964, among several other honours.

King was arrested 5 times and wrote his second most influential speech whilst in prison in 1963 for protesting against the treatment of the black community in Birmingham, Alabama. Arrested for his involvement on April 12, King penned the civil rights manifesto known as the “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” an eloquent defence of civil disobedience addressed to a group of white clergymen who had criticized his tactics.

Later that year, King organised the ‘March on Washington’ for Jobs and Freedom, a peaceful political rally designed to shed light on the injustices African Americans continued to face across the country. The March on Washington culminated in King’s most famous address, known as the “I Have a Dream” speech, a spirited call for peace and equality that many consider a masterpiece of rhetoric.

Tragically, in 1968 he was assassinated in his hotel at the age of just 39.

The post Sometimes You Just Have to Break the Law appeared first on Ambipro.