Human Rights Act fails us all again

[sjn2004]

princeperch said:

sjn2004 said:

How does the HRA work exactly?

For example, some scumbag is about to get taken to the airport and deported but suddenly they press a magic button and some lawyer steps out of the cupboard, effectively the government then gives said lawyer a blank cheque and then starts a merry-go-round of expensive nonsense that usually ends up in "scumbag" staying here at our expense?

People in the third world must thinks we're crazy!

the home office (UKBA) will issue removal directions/deportation notice, normally giving the scumbag 72 hrs notice or thereabouts.

The scumbags lawyer will normally make representations to the UKBA that their client's article 3/6/8 rights will be unlawfully breached if their client is removed. They generally either apply to the high court for an injunction to restrain removal and then undertake to issue proceedings for judicial review in respect of the decision to deport/remove.

The JR will then either be dealt with in a time frame of around a month to 6 months, which will clarify whether the scumbags human rights have been unlawfully breached.

All at tax payers expense of course.

So who connects the "scumbag" with the fancy lawyer?

[odyssey2200]

Blue Meanie said:

All this talk of "at the taxpayers expense" is quite ludicrous. Who exactly decides who can, and cannot use the benefits of our legal system? It should be for all, and not for just who we think deserves it.

Sure!

Invite the whole world over for a dip into our pockets!

[sjn2004]

Blue Meanie said:

And they couldn't take him back inside as the cameras were covering the hostages outside... All this talk of "at the taxpayers expense" is quite ludicrous. Who exactly decides who can, and cannot use the benefits of our legal system? It should be for all, and not for just who we think deserves it.

It should be for all with a British Passport/valid visa not for Terrorists/illegals/criminals.

[Blue Meanie]

princeperch said:

Blue Meanie said:

And they couldn't take him back inside as the cameras were covering the hostages outside... All this talk of "at the taxpayers expense" is quite ludicrous. Who exactly decides who can, and cannot use the benefits of our legal system? It should be for all, and not for just who we think deserves it.

legal aid

Princessperch... Yup, I understand legal aid, thank you very much. My comment was aimed at ose who seem aghast that this fellow may be actually using it. As I said, it should be available to no-one, or everyone, not just who they feel are fit to use it.

[Somewhatfoolish]

odyssey2200 said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

This is the meaning of human rights, chaps. Either declare him a non human, decide that you don't want human rights, or live with it.

I'll take option 1 please!

That's fine, so long as you accept it. In fact all evidence suggests that most people are fine with that idea; in effect supporting a communitarian ideal.

Which is why this general election you should support labour

As for me, I'll stick with my liber(al/tarian) tendencies and stand up for UK tradition... bill of rights, magna carter, common law and so on. Are you aware the original European Charter of Human Rights was written by a brit?

[odyssey2200]

Somewhatfoolish said:

[
Which is why this general election you should support labour

Are you a mental person?

Have you missed your medication?

[Sheets Tabuer]

The human rights act seems fine to me

Copied form the directgov website.

Your human rights are:

•the right to life
•freedom from torture and degrading treatment
•freedom from slavery and forced labour
•the right to liberty
•the right to a fair trial
•the right not to be punished for something that wasn't a crime when you did it
•the right to respect for private and family life
•freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom to express your beliefs
•freedom of expression
•freedom of assembly and association
•the right to marry and to start a family
•the right not to be discriminated against in respect of these rights and freedoms
•the right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
•the right to an education
•the right to participate in free elections
•the right not to be subjected to the death penalty

[odyssey2200]

somewhere

The right to come to the UK
The right to sponge off of the UK Tax payer
The right to not be deported having committed a crime
The right to spent the tax payers money on legal aid to establish the above


all seem to have been added.

[Somewhatfoolish]

odyssey2200 said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

[
Which is why this general election you should support labour

Are you a mental person?

Have you missed your medication?

I'm not the one who suits them, you are. Essentially you are putting forward the view that society takes precedent over the individual... there's nothing right or wrong about that objectively - I happen to disagree - but if you believe that then you should vote Labour.

[Blue Meanie]

Deportation isn't an issue, it is the deportation to a country with the death penalty. I believe they got round this with the us as deportees do not get the death penalty, I think.

[odyssey2200]

Somewhatfoolish said:

odyssey2200 said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

[
Which is why this general election you should support labour

Are you a mental person?

Have you missed your medication?

I'm not the one who suits them, you are. Essentially you are putting forward the view that society takes precedent over the individual... there's nothing right or wrong about that objectively - I happen to disagree - but if you believe that then you should vote Labour.

Labour is the most PC bunch of fkwitts to ever hold power.

The man came to the UK committed a crime and now we will spend huge sums of money caring for the poor misunderstood soul.

[princeperch]

sjn2004 said:

princeperch said:

sjn2004 said:

How does the HRA work exactly?

For example, some scumbag is about to get taken to the airport and deported but suddenly they press a magic button and some lawyer steps out of the cupboard, effectively the government then gives said lawyer a blank cheque and then starts a merry-go-round of expensive nonsense that usually ends up in "scumbag" staying here at our expense?

People in the third world must thinks we're crazy!

the home office (UKBA) will issue removal directions/deportation notice, normally giving the scumbag 72 hrs notice or thereabouts.

The scumbags lawyer will normally make representations to the UKBA that their client's article 3/6/8 rights will be unlawfully breached if their client is removed. They generally either apply to the high court for an injunction to restrain removal and then undertake to issue proceedings for judicial review in respect of the decision to deport/remove.

The JR will then either be dealt with in a time frame of around a month to 6 months, which will clarify whether the scumbags human rights have been unlawfully breached.

All at tax payers expense of course.

So who connects the "scumbag" with the fancy lawyer?

he will no doubt already have a lawyer instructed to deal with his immigration matters. they are well aware of their rights.

[princeperch]

odyssey2200 said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

odyssey2200 said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

[
Which is why this general election you should support labour

Are you a mental person?

Have you missed your medication?

I'm not the one who suits them, you are. Essentially you are putting forward the view that society takes precedent over the individual... there's nothing right or wrong about that objectively - I happen to disagree - but if you believe that then you should vote Labour.

Labour is the most PC bunch of fkwitts to ever hold power.

The man came to the UK committed a crime and now we will spend huge sums of money caring for the poor misunderstood soul.

If the home office can get him out, they will get him out...

[LD1Racing]

Sheets Tabuer said:

The human rights act seems fine to me

Copied form the directgov website.

Your human rights are:

•the right to life well, ok
•freedom from torture and degrading treatment not if you are a criminal/terrorist
•freedom from slavery and forced labour see above
•the right to liberty define liberty
•the right to a fair trial nope, everyone should know who you are and what you've done in the past when you walk into a court
•the right not to be punished for something that wasn't a crime when you did it
•the right to respect for private and family life
•freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom to express your beliefs
•freedom of expression so how come people are sacked for telling non-PC jokes?, oh freedom of PC expression
•freedom of assembly and association
•the right to marry and to start a family yes, if you can afford to support said family, rather than starting a family when already relying on state handouts
•the right not to be discriminated against in respect of these rights and freedoms
•the right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
•the right to an education
•the right to participate in free elections
•the right not to be subjected to the death penalty

The rest are ok I suppose, but there are many contradictory rights, such as peacefuly enjoying one's property while another group of people are excercising their right to free expression, assembly and association at the end of one's garden. Whose rights are more important there?

[SmoothRB]

Somewhatfoolish said:

This is the meaning of human rights, chaps. Either declare him a non human, decide that you don't want human rights, or live with it.

Who voted for these 'rights'?

[SmoothRB]

Somewhatfoolish said:

odyssey2200 said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

This is the meaning of human rights, chaps. Either declare him a non human, decide that you don't want human rights, or live with it.

I'll take option 1 please!

That's fine, so long as you accept it. In fact all evidence suggests that most people are fine with that idea; in effect supporting a communitarian ideal.

Which is why this general election you should support labour

As for me, I'll stick with my liber(al/tarian) tendencies and stand up for UK tradition... bill of rights, magna carter, common law and so on. Are you aware the original European Charter of Human Rights was written by a brit?

Not being able to deport foreign criminals has NOTHING to do with Magna Carter or Bill of rights. Please get a clue.

[Somewhatfoolish]

SmoothRB said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

This is the meaning of human rights, chaps. Either declare him a non human, decide that you don't want human rights, or live with it.

Who voted for these 'rights'?

What definition of vote?

[Blue Meanie]

It's amazing how quickly people will dismiss rights when it suits them. You remove for one, you remove for all.

PS... It is human right, not British rights...

Edited by Blue Meanie on Sunday 2nd May 22:45

[Somewhatfoolish]

SmoothRB said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

odyssey2200 said:

Somewhatfoolish said:

This is the meaning of human rights, chaps. Either declare him a non human, decide that you don't want human rights, or live with it.

I'll take option 1 please!

That's fine, so long as you accept it. In fact all evidence suggests that most people are fine with that idea; in effect supporting a communitarian ideal.

Which is why this general election you should support labour

As for me, I'll stick with my liber(al/tarian) tendencies and stand up for UK tradition... bill of rights, magna carter, common law and so on. Are you aware the original European Charter of Human Rights was written by a brit?

Not being able to deport foreign criminals has NOTHING to do with Magna Carter or Bill of rights. Please get a clue.

Of course not, but I mention them by way of setting a historical background for our progress... how we once led the world...

[SmoothRB]

Blue Meanie said:

It's amazing how quickly people will dismiss rights when it suits them. You remove for one, you remove for all.

PS... It is human right, not British rights...

Edited by Blue Meanie on Sunday 2nd May 22:45

It's only a 'human right' 'cos we call it so.