Cable Forum

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33681562)

denphone 02-10-2011 05:35
Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Theresa May, the Home Secretary, risks an explosive rift inside the Coalition with an explicit call for the scrapping of the Human Rights Act and l for one agree with with her.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ights-Act.html

martyh 02-10-2011 07:28
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
It doesn't need scrapping it needs implementing correctly .We need to stop lawers using it to benefit criminals in ways it wasn't ever intended .Reworking yes ,scrapping no

Hugh 02-10-2011 07:42
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Agreed.

Ignitionnet 02-10-2011 07:47
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
This is one of those things that can't be done. You can't 'rework' the HRA as it implements something else, the European Convention on Human Rights, into British law.

As soon as you mention defying his lovers in Europe Nick Clegg gets all angsty and the policy brings the coalition down if the Tories push it hard enough.

Could be interesting, rather hope it happens followed by a Tory move towards EU-scepticism.

martyh 02-10-2011 08:09
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35308539)
This is one of those things that can't be done. You can't 'rework' the HRA as it implements something else, the European Convention on Human Rights, into British law.

As soon as you mention defying his lovers in Europe Nick Clegg gets all angsty and the policy brings the coalition down if the Tories push it hard enough.

Could be interesting, rather hope it happens followed by a Tory move towards EU-scepticism.
What's going to be interesting is how far the Tories distance themselves from the LibDems during the conference next week It's seems very telling to me that she chooses the eve of the conference to directly opose Nick Clegg

Ignitionnet 02-10-2011 08:17
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35308546)
What's going to be interesting is how far the Tories distance themselves from the LibDems during the conference next week It's seems very telling to me that she chooses the eve of the conference to directly opose Nick Clegg
It is. I'm beyond seeing this coalition as good government and seeing it as showing much of the worst of both. I rather hope it gets messily splintered now.

I can genuinely see a lot of Tory crimes forgiven if they follow a populist EU-sceptic mandate and them being able to blame an awful lot on the Liberal Democrats and it sticking.

techguyone 02-10-2011 08:34
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35308550)
It is. I'm beyond seeing this coalition as good government and seeing it as showing much of the worst of both.

Yup I think now we (the living public) can now see first hand what fun coalitions are, hopefully this will put paid to any changes in the voting system now we see what a botch up they really are. I wouldn't expect any particular mix of political parties to fare any better either in a coalition scenario.

Damien 02-10-2011 09:03
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
The European Convention On Human Rights is not a direction from the EU. It's predates the European Union and was set up in the aftermath of WW2. In fact we were instrumental it in.

Here is the Act: http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum.../dg_070456.pdf

Quote:
  • Right to life
  • Prohibition of torture
  • Prohibition of slavery and forced labour
  • Right to liberty and security
  • Right to a fair trial
  • No punishment without law
  • Right to respect for private and family life
  • Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
  • Freedom of expression
  • Freedom of assembly and association
  • Right to marry
  • Prohibition of discrimination
  • Restrictions on political activity of aliens
  • Prohibition of abuse of rights
  • Limitation on use of restrictions on rights
I want to know which of the above May thinks needs to be abolished.

Russ 02-10-2011 09:06
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
I don't think they need to be abolished, just some amendments to stop people using them to get around the law.

martyh 02-10-2011 09:11
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35308572)
I don't think they need to be abolished, just some amendments to stop people using them to get around the law.

Is it possible or morally correct to introduce exceptions, such as criminals.If you are convicted of a jailable offence you forfeit the right to benefit from the HRA after all if you are in jail then 9 times out of 10 you have deprived someone else of their human rights.

Damien 02-10-2011 09:17
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35308573)
Is it possible or morally correct to introduce exceptions, such as criminals.If you are convicted of a jailable offence you forfeit the right to benefit from the HRA after all if you are in jail then 9 times out of 10 you have deprived someone else of their human rights.
Which protections should be revoked?

martyh 02-10-2011 09:22
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35308576)
Which protections should be revoked?
I take it that's a no then ;)

I take your point though ,if we stopped criminals having the rights so they couldn't use the "right to family life" for example ,as a means to get out of jail then we would have to allow torture and they wouldn't get a fair trial in the first place

Kymmy 02-10-2011 09:25
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
The HRA should have one amendment in that it should never be allowed to take precedent over a country's structure of law and associated punishment/actions in relation to those laws.

Damien 02-10-2011 09:31
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kymmy (Post 35308582)
The HRA should have one amendment in that it should never be allowed to take precedent over a country's structure of law and associated punishment/actions in relation to those laws.
Well it does because your right to a fair trial, prohibition of torture and the death penalty, and something not being made retrospectively illegal are all enshrined in the act. In fact such an amendment would make a large portion of the document worthless because a key part of the act focuses on the relationship between the state and her citizens.

Chrysalis 02-10-2011 10:08
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
The problem is I thought would it be abused if scrapped?

Then read further into the article and go to this bit.

Quote:
we have in being unable to deport people who perhaps are terrorist suspects
No problem deporting convicted terrorists, but suspects I have a problem with. Basically the act is stopping them treating innocent people as guilty and they dont like it. Also I think the affect on welfare claimants would be horrific without such an act.

Maggy 02-10-2011 10:10
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35308530)
It doesn't need scrapping it needs implementing correctly .We need to stop lawers using it to benefit criminals in ways it wasn't ever intended .Reworking yes ,scrapping no
:tu:

Not reworking just re-interpretation perhaps.

Ignitionnet 02-10-2011 10:21
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
I doubt the issue is with the convention as enshrined within the HRA itself, so much as the judicial activism from the ECHR and the ridiculous nature of the cases which are arriving there - enabled by the HRA's problems, and ably assisted by the UK Supreme Court having to defer to its jurisprudence.

At the moment it makes a mockery of the various levels of the UK court system and the convention itself when legislation quite rightly set up in response to the most horrific human rights abuses is being used so relatively trivially.

The existing framework has nothing to prevent this. In addition the ECHR seems extremely reluctant to apply its own doctrine of margin of appreciation - what's considered appropriate for a strongly socialist and statist state recently removed from the USSR isn't necessarily appropriate for a modern, centre-right nation which has enshrined human rights in its own right via law for centuries like the UK.

In short one size fits all doesn't work, the ECHR isn't supposed to apply this but is. We can't change the makeup of the ECHR significantly however we can avoid its quite frankly often unwanted and unnecessary interference in a nation that managed to get by without having a court with a large selection of statist former-communists sitting in judgement on us for quite some time.

Sadly much of the EU, from its commission's president downwards, is 'former' communists so a one size fits all approach is rather within the DNA.

---------- Post added at 11:21 ---------- Previous post was at 11:11 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35308567)
The European Convention On Human Rights is not a direction from the EU. It's predates the European Union and was set up in the aftermath of WW2. In fact we were instrumental it in.

Here is the Act: http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum.../dg_070456.pdf



I want to know which of the above May thinks needs to be abolished.
The opposition isn't to the convention, it's to the HRA.

The ECHR is a basic framework for a civilised society, rendering the country subservient to the jurisprudence of from the European Court of Human Rights and their interpretations of the convention, some of which are incredibly debatable, not so much.

The HRA has become a monster and has gone way beyond its original intention - see its use in civil cases as an example when the convention was put in place to prevent states from abusing their citizens, not protect a footballer's privacy when he's shagging around.

It's all too simplistic to point to the obviously good and correct convention but we aren't talking about that, we're talking about the HRA which isn't so good or correct, is prone to misuse and judicial activism at home and abroad, and that it's another way our elected parliament loses its legislative supremacy.

Damien 02-10-2011 11:46
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35308610)
The opposition isn't to the convention, it's to the HRA.

The ECHR is a basic framework for a civilised society, rendering the country subservient to the jurisprudence of from the European Court of Human Rights and their interpretations of the convention, some of which are incredibly debatable, not so much.

The HRA has become a monster and has gone way beyond its original intention - see its use in civil cases as an example when the convention was put in place to prevent states from abusing their citizens, not protect a footballer's privacy when he's shagging around.

It's all too simplistic to point to the obviously good and correct convention but we aren't talking about that, we're talking about the HRA which isn't so good or correct, is prone to misuse and judicial activism at home and abroad, and that it's another way our elected parliament loses its legislative supremacy.
Isn't the HRA just the ECHR enshrined in British law? Looking over them there doesn't appear to be anything other than cosmetic differences. (Incidentally the bill I linked to was the HRA, I was just pointing out that the EU and the European Court of Human Rights are not the same thing).

Which makes me think that this is nothing but a PR exercise by the government. They will not leave the ECHR so any new bill will have to abide by it in the same way the current HRA does. They can't change or remove acts, only add to them. I suspect it will be largely the same, only with more populist language.

Maggy 02-10-2011 12:23
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35308688)
Isn't the HRA just the ECHR enshrined in British law? Looking over them there doesn't appear to be anything other than cosmetic differences. (Incidentally the bill I linked to was the HRA, I was just pointing out that the EU and the European Court of Human Rights are not the same thing).

Which makes me think that this is nothing but a PR exercise by the government. They will not leave the ECHR so any new bill will have to abide by it in the same way the current HRA does. They can't change or remove acts, only add to them. I suspect it will be largely the same, only with more populist language.
You mean a re-interpretation surely.

Sirius 02-10-2011 12:28
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35308512)
Theresa May, the Home Secretary, risks an explosive rift inside the Coalition with an explicit call for the scrapping of the Human Rights Act and l for one agree with with her.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ights-Act.html
So do i.

XxAmazingStarxX 02-10-2011 13:13
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 35308711)
So do i.
Yup maybe go back to the old days of hanging actually for dangerous criminals?;) or at the very least jailed for life...

Sirius 02-10-2011 14:00
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by XxAmazingStarxX (Post 35308733)
Yup maybe go back to the old days of hanging actually for dangerous criminals?;) or at the very least jailed for life...
Nope i am thinking more along the lines that the criminals seem to be the most prolific users of the HRA and mainly to get them of being punished.

Ignitionnet 02-10-2011 14:36
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35308688)
Isn't the HRA just the ECHR enshrined in British law? Looking over them there doesn't appear to be anything other than cosmetic differences. (Incidentally the bill I linked to was the HRA, I was just pointing out that the EU and the European Court of Human Rights are not the same thing).

Which makes me think that this is nothing but a PR exercise by the government. They will not leave the ECHR so any new bill will have to abide by it in the same way the current HRA does. They can't change or remove acts, only add to them. I suspect it will be largely the same, only with more populist language.
It will naturally be largely the same, however it can restrict the ECHR to application only between state and people, rather than it being used in civil cases, and remove various curiosities that have arisen during its implementation.

That the HRA is being used by footballers to try and hide that they've been scoring in goals they shouldn't be is surely an indication that things are broken?

XxAmazingStarxX 02-10-2011 15:00
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 35308768)
Nope i am thinking more along the lines that the criminals seem to be the most prolific users of the HRA and mainly to get them of being punished.
Oh okay but don't u think it would just be better if they were hanged as being.punished may not even work as they may just build up thirty crime skills by being with other criminals. But by deporting that wouldn't teach them...

Hom3r 02-10-2011 17:39
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
What we need to stop is cases along the lines of his.

A guy kills a load of people in cold blood inc. kids.

He is found guilty and set to prison with a whole life tariff.

He then appeals that it's against his HR, for a whole life in prison.

that should STOP.

Hugh 02-10-2011 17:42
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Has that actually happened in the UK?

nashville 02-10-2011 17:56
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
To many do- gooders in this country. Send criminals back to their own country.

Sirius 02-10-2011 18:07
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35308892)
Has that actually happened in the UK?
Found this on wiki and relates to the European court investigating via the HRA

Quote:
In February 2007, the European Court of Human Rights announced that it was considering whether it is a contravention of human rights for someone to be sentenced to lifelong imprisonment.[citation needed] This news was made public just after David Bieber was due to lodge an appeal against the trial judge's recommendation that he should never be released from prison. His appeal was due to have been heard at this time, but was delayed due to this uncertainty as to whether lifelong imprisonment will remain lawful. If the European judges rule that lifelong imprisonment is a violation of human rights, all prisoners serving whole life orders will have their cases recalled to the courts for a new minimum term to be set. Such a ruling would be highly controversial in many other European countries where the option for whole-life sentences exists, as some European states have whole-life sentences, whereas others do not. For instance in the Netherlands, when a life sentence is passed, it is always intended to mean "life" and as such there is no possibility for parole. So far, just two Dutch life sentence prisoners have been freed, and it was due to terminal illness in both cases. In Spain, on the other hand, the maximum time anyone can serve in prison is 40 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_im...land_and_Wales

The HRA at the moment is in the press because its used predominantly by canny defence lawyers to allow criminals to evade the law or reduce there sentences. It was used i believe to allow a burglar out of prison because he is the main parent of a child.

denphone 02-10-2011 19:35
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nashville (Post 35308898)
To many do- gooders in this country. Send criminals back to their own country.
Exactly.

Hugh 02-10-2011 19:43
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 35308900)
Found this on wiki and relates to the European court investigating via the HRA



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_im...land_and_Wales

The HRA at the moment is in the press because its used predominantly by canny defence lawyers to allow criminals to evade the law or reduce there sentences. It was used i believe to allow a burglar out of prison because he is the main parent of a child.
Thanks for this.

I was referring to the statement above "A guy kills a load of people in cold blood inc. kids.

He is found guilty and set to prison with a whole life tariff.

He then appeals that it's against his HR, for a whole life in prison."

Has this actually happened in the UK?

Tezcatlipoca 02-10-2011 20:11
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nashville (Post 35308898)
To many do- gooders in this country. Send criminals back to their own country.
What if their own country is the UK?

Chrysalis 03-10-2011 07:25
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
funny how easy it is to conveniantly ignore the fact the government want to use the act on unconvicted people. Not a single comment in reference to the bit I highlighted.

Ignitionnet 03-10-2011 07:30
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 35309083)
funny how easy it is to conveniantly ignore the fact the government want to use the act on unconvicted people. Not a single comment in reference to the bit I highlighted.
Err the HRA is supposed to enshrine the ECHR within UK law, these are the fundamental rights of people against the government. The government doesn't 'use' the HRA on anyone, convicted or otherwise, hence the lack of a reference to them doing so.

Chrysalis 03-10-2011 07:34
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35309085)
Err the HRA is supposed to enshrine the ECHR within UK law, these are the fundamental rights of people against the government. The government doesn't 'use' the HRA on anyone, convicted or otherwise, hence the lack of a reference to them doing so.
I meant the terrorist act and other acts sorry.

So basically the government are finding the HRA a barrier to doing things against unconvicted people.

Ignitionnet 03-10-2011 08:08
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 35309086)
I meant the terrorist act and other acts sorry.

So basically the government are finding the HRA a barrier to doing things against unconvicted people.
Probably, amongst many other motivations to replace this feature creeper.

Hom3r 03-10-2011 17:23
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35308955)
Thanks for this.

I was referring to the statement above "A guy kills a load of people in cold blood inc. kids.

He is found guilty and set to prison with a whole life tariff.

He then appeals that it's against his HR, for a whole life in prison."

Has this actually happened in the UK?
It wasn't a statement of fact, but what can happen.

Hugh 03-10-2011 17:44
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
You stated that "What we need to stop is cases along the lines of his.

A guy kills a load of people in cold blood inc. kids.""

Stopping cases like that usually implies they have happened - if it hasn't happened, we don't need to stop it, do we?

Stuart 03-10-2011 19:50
Re: Home Secretary: scrap the Human Rights Act
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35309099)
Probably, amongst many other motivations to replace this feature creeper.
And yet people are calling it to be repealed. Well done people, you are calling for your own rights to be reduced.


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:58.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum