The European Court Of Human Rights..

[Sombrero]

Thing is Somby, at any murder trial up and down the country,,, Have you ever heard a solicitor/judge/barrister, etc mention the human rights the bloody victim had (up until the time he/she expired? Nah, the bloody do gooders (do no good at all IMHO) conveniently forget that a victim, had the same human rights these criminals now seem to enjoy.(but sadly had them taken away through the very act of murder) The justice system in this country seems to favour the wrongdoer, instead of the victim.....
In other words it's fooked.

Your rant is welcome... very welcome... but you didn't read my post because I think we're talking the same thing.. the human rights of the many versus the human rights of the one !!

 

[jeds]

You give up your human rights from the moment you commit murder, rape, child molestation, terrorism, etc.

 

[JBR]

You give up your human rights from the moment you commit murder, rape, child molestation, terrorism, etc.

Not quite right, though, is it?

You should give up your human rights from the moment you commit murder, rape, child molestation, terrorism, etc.

In practice, though, these people somehow seem to acquire more rights.

 

[Peter1919]

It's not so much the ECHR, but the Human Rights Act itself that needs replacing. This bit of legislation should be scrapped and replaced with a Human Responsibilities Act.
British Law should be run from Britain, not some jumped up judges in foreign climes, who declare time after time, that foreign criminals are entitled to stay in the UK just because they've been here a few years and settled down. They obviously have settled into a life of crime.

Care to actually make an argument that makes any sense? The Human Rights Act is a British Law about which judgements are made on in British Courts by British judges. If we scrap the Human Rights Act then we go back to the situation we had before it where far more such judgements we made by the ECHR in Strasbourg rather than in British Courts under British Law.

 

[JBR]

It's not so much the ECHR, but the Human Rights Act itself that needs replacing. This bit of legislation should be scrapped and replaced with a Human Responsibilities Act.
British Law should be run from Britain, not some jumped up judges in foreign climes, who declare time after time, that foreign criminals are entitled to stay in the UK just because they've been here a few years and settled down. They obviously have settled into a life of crime.

Care to actually make an argument that makes any sense? The Human Rights Act is a British Law about which judgements are made on in British Courts by British judges. If we scrap the Human Rights Act then we go back to the situation we had before it where far more such judgements we made by the ECHR in Strasbourg rather than in British Courts under British Law.

Please read again. Jock has stated that the Human Rights Act be replaced by a 'Human Responsibilities Act'. With this, I agree on the grounds that far more stress should be placed on the responsibilities of the citizens of a civilised society than just their rights. I'm fed up of hearing people claiming this right and that right and, at the same time, ignoring their responsibilities. Such behaviour, incidentally, continues to be encouraged by the 'no win, no fee brigade'.

You may have missed his statement that British law should be run from Britain, and not the EU, with which I think you probably agree.

 

[Peter1919]

My point is that it already is largely British law run from Britain under British Judges and that is due to the Human Rights Act.

None of this has anything at all to do with the EU. In fact Britain was largely responsible for drafting the European Convention on Human Rights (which the European Court of Human Rights is there to uphold) in 1950 and getting other European Countries to sign up to it. Note this was decades before Britain joined the EEC (as the EU was when we joined)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights

 

[JBR]

None of this has anything at all to do with the EU.

But cannot the ECHR over-rule judgements made by British courts?

 

[Peter1919]

Only true in very limited circumstances including only after all domestic court appeals have been exhausted (which due British Human Rights Act being a UK law means many fewer cases make it past the UK courts now and those that do are much less likely to be successful).

None of this alters the fact it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the EU. Even if Britain left the EU tomorrow Britain would still be a signatory to the European Convention on human Rights and subject to the European Court of Human Rights as we were before we joined the EEC.

 

[JBR]

True, but if we can pluck up the courage to leave the EU, we can also leave the ECHR.

I'd like to see the return of complete sovereignty for the UK.

Vote UKIP.

 

[Dextraneous]

I read somewhere that by Nov 2014 the Lisbon treaty will be fully ratified which means that we will no longer be able to invoke article 50 (ie our statement of intent to leave) without 25 member states giving permission. If true, this means that a referendum will be of no purpose anyway.

 

[chapeau]

You read wrong.

 

[Dextraneous]

I hope so

 

[FiremanT]

Perhaps is should be replaced by ECOHR&R.

There IS a need for a protector of the downtrodden, but there appears to be a lack of counterbalance

 

[JBR]

I read somewhere that by Nov 2014 the Lisbon treaty will be fully ratified which means that we will no longer be able to invoke article 50 (ie our statement of intent to leave) without 25 member states giving permission. If true, this means that a referendum will be of no purpose anyway.

Then we'll have to fight for our freedom. It's been done before, though I'm not exactly full of confidence that we'd be very good at it now.

Perhaps America will come to our aid again...

...three years late, of course.

 

[jockscott]

Peter, While the Human Rights Act might be a piece of British legislation, it was aimed to bring us in line with the European Convention on Human Rights, (a bit of Brussels stuff, which is having a great impact on British courts). The HRA, places a duty on British courts to interpret legislation so it's compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, So, although it is a British Law, it embraces everything European and is designed to kow tow to Europe.
This is the law that allows foreigners to our shores, to drive (whilst drunk), without insurance and knock down and kill children, with no fear of being deported, Allows foreign criminals who are repeat offenders to claim their right to live here, simply because they now own a cat, budgie, hamster etc, or have a relationship with some woman of ill repute, (who just happens to be born in the UK.)