Human Rights Erosion- does this worry you?

25Avalon

We have The Human Rights Act of 1998 introduced by Labour. Tony Blair was most unhappy that the European Court upheld the rights of criminals over citizens rights to safety. Successive Governments have agreed with him. Our law does not need foreign intervention whereby for example the European Court prevents a man guilty of rape from being deported, against the rights of the woman raped and our own Supreme Court.

Once more with feeling...

The court you are referencing does not represent a "foreign court". It is an international court, set up by Britain, which happens to sit in Strasbourg. It is there to prevent national governments trying to do things that are illegal internationally. It was set up by Britain in the wake of WWII, where the German courts were acting completely within their national laws. Look how that turned out.

Yes it concerns me hugely.

One of the reasons I voted remain was that I liked being part of an organisation large enough to temper the worst excesses of individual member states. Losing that was a blow. To now lose the ECHR and human rights that have taken generations to win is taking us to a very dark place.

It's clear from many posts on here and information I read elsewhere that the people who most support the removal of these checks do so either through ignorance or because they personally stand to gain.

We desperately need a written constitution. It would make it much harder to bin the legal protection of human rights, and stop the wrecking of the GFA, or indeed ignore the written constitution between Westminster and the devolved countries.

A written constitution would also pin down the separation of powers,, preventing a rogue government from trashing this vital separation.

Interesting growstuff I had completely forgotten about that - but the notion of "people in distress" has been popping into my mind a lot recently about this terrible business - so I suppose my thinking about this as "the government's Fascist plan" has subconsciously brought the two together.
Thanks for reminding me.

volver

25Avalon

We have The Human Rights Act of 1998 introduced by Labour. Tony Blair was most unhappy that the European Court upheld the rights of criminals over citizens rights to safety. Successive Governments have agreed with him. Our law does not need foreign intervention whereby for example the European Court prevents a man guilty of rape from being deported, against the rights of the woman raped and our own Supreme Court.

Once more with feeling...

The court you are referencing does not represent a "foreign court". It is an international court, set up by Britain, which happens to sit in Strasbourg. It is there to prevent national governments trying to do things that are illegal internationally. It was set up by Britain in the wake of WWII, where the German courts were acting completely within their national laws. Look how that turned out.

Many of those sitting in judgement are British judges/lawyers.

But not all. My vote is for the supremacy of UK courts.

Germanshepherdsmum

But not all. My vote is for the supremacy of UK courts.

Mine isn’t. Such a system lends itself to corruption.

I'm with Casdon.

Casdon

Germanshepherdsmum

But not all. My vote is for the supremacy of UK courts.

Mine isn’t. Such a system lends itself to corruption.

Agreed. It's actually frightening to think that our rights are systematically being dismantled, and there is no higher court to which to appeal.

Casdon

Germanshepherdsmum

But not all. My vote is for the supremacy of UK courts.

Mine isn’t. Such a system lends itself to corruption.

Yes particularly with this government you simply can’t trust it to retain the separation of powers.

Very very worrying.

The proposed legislation removes human rights from UK citizens - it does not increase them in any way, however the right wing media is spinning it.

growstuff

The proposed legislation removes human rights from UK citizens - it does not increase them in any way, however the right wing media is spinning it.

This is the essence of it. How can anyone support it?

RichmondPark

growstuff

The proposed legislation removes human rights from UK citizens - it does not increase them in any way, however the right wing media is spinning it.

This is the essence of it. How can anyone support it?

Maybe because they think some people shouldn't have any human rights, particularly "others". They don't appear to understand the concept that human rights are universal.

MawtheMerrier

And to think he might be a contender for Tory leader - God help us.
Apart from his politics, he doesn’t even seem to be the sharpest knife in the drawer or even particularly diligent (remember how he was still sunning himself on a beach while Afghanistan was supposed to be evacuated. )

You do have to ask if there are any sharp knives in that particular drawer.

Whitewavemark2

We desperately need a written constitution. It would make it much harder to bin the legal protection of human rights, and stop the wrecking of the GFA, or indeed ignore the written constitution between Westminster and the devolved countries.

A written constitution would also pin down the separation of powers,, preventing a rogue government from trashing this vital separation.

I agree. But we don’t want THIS government writing it!

Richmond Park, I agree. Remaining would have given us some protection from the steady erosion of rights inflicted on us by any government with an agenda of its own.
Where do we go from here?

MayBee70

Whitewavemark2

We desperately need a written constitution. It would make it much harder to bin the legal protection of human rights, and stop the wrecking of the GFA, or indeed ignore the written constitution between Westminster and the devolved countries.

A written constitution would also pin down the separation of powers,, preventing a rogue government from trashing this vital separation.

I agree. But we don’t want THIS government writing it!

True

Much of the constitution is written. It simply isn’t codified.

We need top to bottom constitutional reform.

I suggest all politicians should be excluded from the process and citizens juries should guide the reforms.

they are trying to silence us

I also think that parliament itself needs a complete overhaul. All the filibustering and jeering is an anachronism. It might be pure pantomime but, at times of crisis it’s just a diversion.

MayBee70

I also think that parliament itself needs a complete overhaul. All the filibustering and jeering is an anachronism. It might be pure pantomime but, at times of crisis it’s just a diversion.

I think that all MPs need a lesson on the Separation of Powers and the roles of the Judiciary, the Legislature and the Executive.

They need a history lesson, too. To remind them of why Charles I had his head chopped off...

MawtheMerrier

And to think he might be a contender for Tory leader - God help us.
Apart from his politics, he doesn’t even seem to be the sharpest knife in the drawer or even particularly diligent (remember how he was still sunning himself on a beach while Afghanistan was supposed to be evacuated. )

Instead of being reprimanded for this he was made Deputy PM. What a despicable bunch Johnson and his Cabinet are.

Can’t promote anyone that might be a threat to the ( add your own term for our great leader)….

It bothers me as much as does the many other things this so-called 'government' is doing and changing to fit their own agenda.

The ERG have a stranglehold on the parliamentary party and Johnson is nothing but their stooge, either complicitly, or he's too dense to realise he is being used.

We are, in fact, witnessing a very British coup and it is dangerous.