Tell me the positive things about leaving the European Court of human rights ?

[Leniriefenfarage]

Apparently the government are considering taking us out of it.
So what are the good things we can look forward to ?

Activists being unable to coerce the UK into accepting bad laws like the GRA by taking test cases to the ECHR and winning them there.

Lots of benefits for a government that wants to repress it's people (look at which countries are out).

For the people, not so much...

Very hard to say without knowing what it would be replaced by- presumably a UK bill of rights.

The arguments for are that it would give the power to create such a bill to the UK parliament and to interpret it to the UK courts.

An obvious argument against this is that the nature of human rights is such that they should be outside the national political fray and not subject to change as our parliament changes. The development of international human rights partly followed WW2, where the Nazi government had passed laws which clearly offended against any notion of human rights (notwithstanding that they were legally valid German laws)- the point of cooperating internationally on rights is to avoid this or at least make it abundantly clear when national governments want to breach the most basic moral rights of their citizens and others. As such, the argument for leaving set out above falls away- the fact that these rights are agreed internationally is not a bug but a feature.

Benefits? Well which human rights would you like to do without?

The only benefit is to a government which wants to oppress the people without having to bother about all those pesky international laws.

Is the motivation something to do with asylum seekers? UK will have autonomy to make its own policies. Sorry I (obviously) haven't a clue

It brings a smile to fromage.

Thats ot. There are no benefits

@ThatLuckyDog but surely removing the ability of one minority to assert their rights affects those of all vulnerable minorities. You might not care for TRAs trying to overturn perceived discriminatory behaviour/treatment but what if other groups are prevented from doing so if we leave it ? Seems like the law of unintended consequences.

Panels of unelected judges overruling UK decisions. The human rights of foreign rapists and murderers taking precedence over the victims, no appeals against deportation. If you commit a crime here you get sent back to your own country

Benefits? Well which human rights would you like to do without?

Not seeing any answers to this so far...

@LakeTiticaca How often does that happen ? How can minorities who have been treated unjustly gain justice ?
Having judges elected makes the whole system subject to political interference. Like Trump stuffed the federal bench with his allies.

Minorities are able to assert their rights in UK courts.

Panels of unelected judges overruling UK decisions. Wait until you hear about judicial review in the UK...

(Okay, 'your decision was unlawfully made and has to be made again =! 'overrule', I guess)

Wait until you hear about our government illegally proroguing parliament...

Wait till you hear all UK judges are unelected!

Ok I'll bite. We would not be forced to take in convicted criminals from foreign countries eg. child rapists or illegal immigrants. We have enough of our own to deal with. It would be replaced with a UK Bill of Rights very similar but it would stop European courts from forcing us to take in convicted criminals or illegal immigrants. Have you looked at what's happening in Sweden?

Don't worry, it won't happen. We'll have a different government after the 4th of July.

I guess one benefit for the current lot would be the ability to break international law even more easily than they already do.

@caringcarer I’d like to know how this Bill of Human rights would be drawn up.
Who decides what those rights would be. The party of government ? The lords or MPs ? Can it be overturned ?

Your comment about convicted criminals was interesting. Shamima Begum was a British ‘criminal’, how come we weren’t made to take her back ? I guess the fact that we made her stateless sorted that out so surely other countries could do the same.

To me the whole idea stinks like Brexit. People thought it would stop immigration. It hasn’t but it has inadvertently prevented us from having freedom of movement and the ability to live in the EU for more than 90 days. Like using a hammer to crack an egg. I fear it will end up being a hugely destructive decision because yet again like the EU referendum it’s far more complex. And yet again the same people are believing lies.

Yes. We know we can trust the Tories with our rights. After all, they've only banned peaceful protest, broken international law (but only in a limited and specific way, after all), and enforced legislation to declare an obviously unsafe country to be safe.

Yeah, nothing to worry about for us plebs there...

None.
Just gives whomever is in power in this country to do as they please with less obstacles.. which is obviously something the tories want for themselves.. but has absolutely no benefits for any person other than them.
However it may be a vote winner if they can swing it as "stopping criminals seeking asylum here"
But in reality it wouldn't stop that and we already could do that.. we ejected one of our own citizens ffs (shamima)
It would just potentially be easier.. however it would also be easier to do shit to anyone already living here if the government took a disliking to them. Anyone who wants to hand more power over to the government to harass people is an idiot. I mean honestly.. you really want the government to not even have to pretend to abuse by the hunan rights act?? Its not just brown people from other countries that's going to effect you know..

And stopped Scotland pushing self-ID through against the wishes of the public…

Reminded me of this sketch with Patric Stuart!

m.youtube.com/watch?v=ptfmAY6M6aA

I saw Keir Starmer "in conversation" a few years ago and he cited this as one of the ideas that scared him most about the current iteration of the Conservative Party. He talked at length and very passionately about how and why international human rights legislation came in to being after WW2 and why it was important we fought to retain it. I believed in it before, but he was very compelling. I'd like to see him talk about this on a more public stage.

I don’t think we’ll get there but not all democratic western countries are part of it of course, eg many live in Australia with their own version.

It is probably why they have been able to act on policies

The only 2 nations not signed up to universal human rights are Russia & Belarus. Do we want to be like them?

You mean the ECHR?

Loads outside Europe obviously aren’t, I just posted about Aus

It’s a successful and well liked country clearly