Scrapping the Human Rights Act

[Willy Nilly]

Blib said:

Along with a new Human Rights Act, could we have, running in tandem with it, a Human Responsibilities Act?

Yes please

[Jasandjules]

Willy Nilly said:

it always seems like the idea behind the act is a good one, but what gets on peoples tits is criminals and wasters hiding behind it

I rather feel that you perhaps have read, and believed, what you read in the press about such cases.

For the avoidance of doubt, most of what is reported in the press is s***e.

[Derek Smith]

Jasandjules said:

I rather feel that you perhaps have read, and believed, what you read in the press about such cases.

For the avoidance of doubt, most of what is reported in the press is s***e.

And most of the rest is crap.

[9mm]

Derek Smith said:

2fast748 said:

This is an interesting link to some of the back stories behind tabloid headlines:

http://rightsinfo.org/infographics/the-14-worst-hu...

At the time of the criticisms of the UK over a blanket ban on persons in jail voting the subject was raised on a TV news programme. After much outrage one chap, a lawyer, but not the one in the case, was interviewed via remote link and he pointed out that what had been said by the presenter (and in many newspapers) was wrong. There was a short argument and the presenter was put right. There was a final comment from him about it being wrong to be forced to even look at it again and then convicted killers were mentioned.

Or rather, that was it until the subject came up again, after a politician, in a farcical attempt at willy-waving, had said that he was exasperated and furious that the UK was being forced to drop the ban. The presenter then said the same things as he'd said the previous time, probably having forgotten everything that had been said by the only person on the previous programme who'd actually read the decision.

On a well-known motoring forum, one apparent supporter of the ban said, in reply to a comment that "Here come thousands more Labour voters then."

"Nail on head.

"I genuinely think this is the reason that the conservatives have fought this for so long.

"Broadly speaking, the scummy working class prison population will vote Labour as a matter of course, therefore adding thousands of Labour voters to the system."

So suggesting that the ban was there for sectional political reasons. Quite funny really.

It all goes to prove that one cannot trust the newspapers and that each person has the obligations to check things themselves.

Even the Guardian seems to blame the HRA whilst acknowledging it's not necessarily the main driver (Chindamo):

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/22/for...

[xjsdriver]

Trailhead said:

Good

It is only used by undesirables anyway

What a strange comment - similar comments were made by those not affected by the regime changes in Nazi Germany in the early days.....and look where it got them. At first they only came for the politically active, but it didn't matter to me, because I wasn't politically active. Then they came for the intellectuals........and so on....und zo fort, und zo fort!!!

Thin end of the wedge!!!!

[Oakey]

Godwin!

Three pages in, is there a prize?

[Terminator X]

2fast748 said:

This is an interesting link to some of the back stories behind tabloid headlines:

http://rightsinfo.org/infographics/the-14-worst-hu...

1500 cases a year though unless I read that wrong! Massive waste of time and resources then.

TX.

[Mojooo]

Terminator X said:

2fast748 said:

This is an interesting link to some of the back stories behind tabloid headlines:

http://rightsinfo.org/infographics/the-14-worst-hu...

1500 cases a year though unless I read that wrong! Massive waste of time and resources then.

TX.

How many judgements did you read to come to that conclusion?

[davepoth]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Those cases probably aren't the problem. The issue is that the ECtHR creates precedent that's effectively binding on the UK.

http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/constitu...

So for example if the court ruled against Romania on something, I could use that case in an argument in a UK court and the judges would to a great extent be bound to follow that ruling. The effect of the small number of rulings multiplies out across Europe, and it's especially apparent in common law jurisdictions such as the UK where the courts have built upon the principles set down by the ECtHR when ruling on matters in the UK.

[Eric Mc]

Oakey said:

Godwin!

Three pages in, is there a prize?

I'm fed up with people smugly shouting "Godwin" and thinking they are clever.

The behaviour of the Nazis is always relevant when governments are suggesting reducing our rights. I would hate to think that each time somebody reminds us of where and how the Nazis began their erosion of rights and freedoms in pre-war Germany we get this knee jerk automated cry of "Godwin" .

[cirian75]

You are all aware the HRA 1998 is an integral part of the Good Friday agreement co-guaranteed by the UK and ROI governments ?

[cirian75]

This is what really make huge minefield

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_Agreement...

Does Cameron and co really want to mess with that !?

[speedy_thrills]

Esseesse said:

Or why do we have it? Was there a problem before the ECHR came about?

Yes.

After the second world war Winston Churchill (who was in opposition but still widely respected and influential) argued "There is a remedy which ... would in a few years make all Europe ... free and ... happy. It is to re-create the European family, or as much of it as we can, and to provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom. We must build a kind of United States of Europe." (Linky to full speech in 1946) so we created the Treaty of London (1949) establishing the Council of Europe to provide that structure. At this time (in addition to the post-war feeling Europe was doomed to repeat it's history without some wider political unity) Churchill foresaw the Iron curtain and wanted to enshrine social progress in a pan-European common legal understanding. The obvious way to achieve this was to establish a Council of Europe (in fact Churchill had spoken of a Council of Europe much earlier) to realise these ambitions and establish the European Convention on Human Rights and a court (ECtHR) to uphold those freedoms.

However this has been inconvenient for the British government at times.

[BlackLabel]

article said:

David Cameron has stepped back from an early confrontation with his own MPs over a controversial move to scrap European human rights laws.

The prime minister has delayed the introduction of a British Bill of Rights, which will not be in the first wave of bills introduced into the Commons after the Queen’s Speech today.

The bill, which seeks to limit abuse of human rights laws, has faced a backlash from Conservative backbenchers and the judiciary.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4452374.ece

[sugerbear]

Wow. No one saw that one coming..

[AJS-]

He really has no clue what he is doing. He obviously had no intention of winning the election and having to implement the absolute balderdash in the manifesto. Quite why the media are so kind to Cameron is a mystery.

[NicD]

We see a steady stream of foreign criminals abusing the concept of human rights via Article 8 etc, enriching the legal fraternity at huge cost to the tax payer.

Would the many vocal supporters of the status quo please post examples of where deserving British subjects actually benefit from the HRA?

[cirian75]

NicD said:

We see a steady stream of foreign criminals abusing the concept of human rights via Article 8 etc, enriching the legal fraternity at huge cost to the tax payer.

Would the many vocal supporters of the status quo please post examples of where deserving British subjects actually benefit from the HRA?

It legally requires our solders to have the correct equipment and to have deficiency's corrected asap when we send them to war.

The reform of the corrupt RUC into the now much better fit for purpose PSNI

[cirian75]

AJS- said:

He really has no clue what he is doing. He obviously had no intention of winning the election and having to implement the absolute balderdash in the manifesto. Quite why the media are so kind to Cameron is a mystery.

Yup, he thought he was going to be in a collation, and when the unfettered polls showed the Tory's ahead it was to late to change tact.

[Adrian W]

cirian75 said:

Yup, he thought he was going to be in a collation, and when the unfettered polls showed the Tory's ahead it was to late to change tact.

He lied, he cant exactly say he hadn't seen the full picture