Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Not to want to lose my human rights on the whim of a government minister?

301 replies

SecondRateFrog · 17/10/2021 18:45

Dominic Raab says he wants to bring in a system which allows the Government to legislate against UK court judgements in human rights cases if it doesn't like them. Without going through a debate or a vote in Parliament.
Is this the end of the role of the courts in our democracy?
"Raab threat to ‘correct’ court judgments is ‘deeply troubling’, warn legal experts"
It's in The Telegraph too.
uk.yahoo.com/news/raab-threat-correct-court-judgments-144345935.html

OP posts:
Dancerinthedark01 · 17/10/2021 22:06

So what you're saying is that the government are going to change the law when they think the courts have made the law in a way that doesn't work for them?

“We will get into the habit of legislating on a more periodic basis and thinking about the mechanism for that,” he said. “Where there have been judgments that – albeit properly and duly delivered by the courts – we think are wrong, the right thing is for parliament to legislate to correct them.”

This shouldn't be complicated. But I'm struggling to get my head round it. Maybe because it's so dreadful and bizarre.

SecondRateFrog · 17/10/2021 22:13

The commentary says that Raab appears to intend to use secondary legislation (so regulations I think) to quickly overturn court judgements that the government isn't happy with. So ministers would be making laws. Not the courts, and not Parliament.

OP posts:
DoctorTwo · 17/10/2021 22:34

It's quite scary when you think about it. Law by governmental decree. That could go so wrong, especially with this bunch of corrupt arseholes. I predict legal chaos.

Loveshelly · 17/10/2021 22:44

People don’t care. So it will happen.

All the daily Mail need to do is report on one incident about someone getting free Netflix in prison and this will be passed with flying colours. And no protest.

Loveshelly · 17/10/2021 22:45

It’s really shocking. Do they have enough power to get this through. I don’t even think most of the Tory back benchers would allow this.

JellyTotCat · 17/10/2021 22:46

It's sinister but it doesn't surprise me unfortunately.

MistyGreenAndBlue · 17/10/2021 22:50

In plain sight. They aren't even trying to hide it now are they?
They think this is a dictatorship.

Queuing4Fergs · 17/10/2021 22:51

It'll be JR'ed soon enough, if it even happens

TatianaBis · 17/10/2021 22:52

Who are the 2.87 posters who think you’re BU?

Viviennemary · 17/10/2021 22:53

I agree. Why do a few judges have the right to overturn the government. It's mad.

wewereliars · 17/10/2021 22:54

We have parliament if the government want to make new law, so that a proper scrutiny of that proposed legislation is considered and debated by the MPs who represent us.

I remember it was parliamentaty sovereignty that the brexit liars were pretending was the reason we had to have brexit.

What Raab seems to be suggesting is government by executive edict with no legislative scrutiny. That breaches the separation of the 3 powers which is fundamental to democracy.

It is the path to tyranny

SecondRateFrog · 17/10/2021 22:55

Meanwhile, a serious attack on Judicial Review is making progress. It would mean that if government action was found by the court to have been unlawful, the government wouldn't have to do anything about the unlawful stuff it had already done.
www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/mps-prepare-to-debate-judicial-review-reforms/5110167.article

OP posts:
Loveshelly · 17/10/2021 22:56

@Viviennemary
You would rather the government who have an agenda decide things??!!!

Viviennemary · 17/10/2021 22:58

Yes. The government are our representatives voted in. Not judges.

wherearemychickens · 17/10/2021 22:59

And at the same time they are limiting our right to protest.

wherearemychickens · 17/10/2021 23:02

My understanding is that judges interpret the law, said law having been duly scrutinised by our elected representatives before being passed into law. Isn't allowing ministers to disregard a judge's opinion another name for dictatorship?

SecondRateFrog · 17/10/2021 23:03

We have the government, Parliament and the courts. The idea is not to put all the power in the hands of only one person/group. It's called "checks and balances". It's what stops us from being a dictatorship.
The Government plans to grab the power to make law from both the courts and Parliament. That is not its role.
We're getting closer to becoming a dictatorship.

OP posts:
TheHateIsNotGood · 17/10/2021 23:04

Just a guess, but I'm assuming you're talking hypothetially - unless you have an actual Human Right that has been infringed that you are currently taking legal proceedings against?

HappyWinter · 17/10/2021 23:07

And at the same time they are limiting our right to protest.

It's terrifying, isn't it? There will be no recourse.

Loveshelly · 17/10/2021 23:08

@Viviennemary
What if the government wasn’t voted in?

SecondRateFrog · 17/10/2021 23:09

I could certainly identify some current human rights breaches for you, TheHate, and I can see plenty more coming over the horizon. Some of them will affect you too.

OP posts:
SecondRateFrog · 17/10/2021 23:10

They've essentially removed the right to demonstrate, haven't they?

OP posts:
Pedalpushers · 17/10/2021 23:12

@Viviennemary you are either trolling or frightfully misinformed about the relationship between parliament and judiciary in this country, as well as what law is and how it works. Law and rights aren't a popularity contest you get to redo every few years.

einekleinenachtarbeit · 17/10/2021 23:14

The comment from @Viviennemary (and his/her misapprehension) demonstrates why the country is in such a mess.

Loveshelly · 17/10/2021 23:15

@einekleinenachtarbeit
It’s scary as fuck.