To think leaving the ECHR (European Court of Human Rights) is a cause for concern?

[WakeUpAndBeAwesome]

On paper, the new Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, looks well qualified to understand the rule of law and flex her legal arm. She seems to be a competent lawyer (but being a good lawyer does not mean someone is also a ‘good person’).

I get that it’s easier for the government to win legal cases if they withdraw from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Change the rules of the games to make it easier to win the game. I get it. But I don’t agree in principle because it’s not in the spirit of the game or rule of law. Some rules put players at a disadvantage, but they’re rules for a reason (reasons that need consideration).

Why do the plans to take the UK out the ECHR sound worrying?

To me, it’s because human right laws were hard won (do people who support getting rid of human rights laws realise that or care?). Once lost it’ll be even harder to win back human rights laws (and they may never be re-won again). Losing human rights protections under the ECHR is a slippery slope imo. We’re all humans with vulnerabilities, so we all benefit from the enforcement of human rights laws under ECHR.

So mature.

I might be wrong but I was listening to Brenda Hale, she of the spider brooch fame, but she said that individuals would still have recourse to the EHCR. What would change is the automatic imposition of its decisions into UK law. The UK was a founding member of the EHCR in 1951. It's got nothing to do with the EU, even though the Conservative Party and Daily Mail would like us to believe.

I see this as another prong in their aim to reduce our legal rights. They have already tinkered with the right to protest, next up is a curb on the right to challenge Government Policy through Judicial Review. The Police have been instructed to look upon journalists are terrorist groups. I think it is very concerning. These are rights fundamental to a functioning democracy.

Certainly the Court can bind the hands of parliament, adds nothing to our prosperity and makes us less secure by preventing the deportation of dangerous foreign nationals. It does nothing to change the attitudes of governments in countries such as Russia when it comes to human rights.

Remember the cases of clerics such as Abu Hamza and Abu Qatada, who were charged with terrorism offenses abroad but avoided extradition from the UK for long periods due to legal battles with the ECHR ?

Whilst severing ties with Strasbourg would give British courts greater powers to deport foreign criminals, it almost certainly won’t happen.

Leaving the ECHR would require another huge legislative programme which would take up a lot of a parliamentary session.

Sorry @Leafy3, misread there.

Bloody hell @Tierne. You are saying: the UK made a system to uphold human rights. But we are so good at human rights we don't need the human rights system we created. We can just kind of wing it and we'll be fine because we're so human-rightsy we don't even need laws about it.

Jaw dropping

Well according to most on here, the UK would be devoid of any rights, if we depart from ECHR

Even more jaw dropping

My bad. Lazy typing. Sorry

It is however the European (not EU) offshoot of the UN convention from which it flows.

So unless the government is also planning on abrogating the treaty obligations to the UN, this isn't a bonfire of human rights

Suella Braverman has been pretty clear. She wants to start with getting rid of our right to not be tortured.

www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/uk-news/tory-leadership-candidate-suella-braverman-torture-human-rights-b2124323.html

The convention on human rights isn't European (EU) law. It is a convention led by Britain who agreed on certain fundamental rights at the end of WW2 and codified them as a means of upholding them.

ukandeu.ac.uk/the-facts/whats-the-difference-between-the-european-convention-on-human-rights-the-european-court-of-human-rights-and-the-european-court-of-justice/#:~:text=The%20ECHR%20and%20its%20court,EU%20law%20within%20the%20EU.

Blinking heck@Fladdermus that could trigger Special Procedures.

Why the great race to go from we wrote this to 'watch out Syria, Afghanistan and the rest

You better have a word with the Associate Dean then, who led that module ! Pretty sure he knew what he was talking about when discussing the EU and its origins. Keyword: origins.

😄

It is very concerning but, at the same time I am looking forward to the likes of @Culldesack and @RudsyFarmer falling foul of any removal of rights somewhere down the line.

Will be hilarious see them back on here moaning about how outrageous it is that X,Y, or Z happened to them and that's not what they expected when they were happy to wave goodbye to an assortment of fundamental rights.

So what are we going to do about it?

Just sit back, roll over and let them get on with it?

The incumbent government does not have a democratic mandate.

The European Court of HR issues legally binding judgements; the UN treaty bodies (Committee against Torture etc) do not. Anyone who thinks domestic or UN mechanisms are equivalent does not fully understand the law.

Article 2 is also a bit of pain. Not killing people upsets tories, as made clear by Patel a while back.

www.indy100.com/news/priti-patel-resurfaced-clip-death-penalty-ian-hislop-question-time-video-home-secretary-9020006

I will be perfectly fine, because 1) I am not so bitterly obsessed with a political party, to the point of self combustion.

2. I understand the relationship between domestic and EU law, which you don't.

3. My rights, as a citizen won't be going anywhere.

In yet another breeding ground thread for the Tory bashers, I'm only amazed the insults and swearing have only occurred several times. Give it till the later shift come on. The same old insults, profanities and lack of reasoning, will surface. Same old, rinse and repeat.

Another thread to wipe your feet on the way out.

It is a worry when the incoming Bill of Rights is described like this, (from the link on my last post about the incoming Bill of Rights being shelved):

“A senior govt source: "The bill [of rights] is a mess and its not going to come back in anything like its current form."

It doesn’t really fill anyone with confidence about their overall competence.

What have the ECHR and ECtHR ever done for us?
There have been several important cases that have gone to the ECtHR which have protected and advanced human rights in the UK.
Freedom of expression for the press comes from a case known as Sunday Times from 1979.
The decriminalisation of homosexual acts in Northern Ireland came about thanks to a case called Dudgeon from 1981.
A case called Smith and Grady made clear that banning LGBT+ people from serving in the Armed Forces breaches human rights.

Of course it’s concerning - it’s bloody terrifying.

Also, I don’t know why it’s quite so hard to grasp but the bottom line is we either all have human rights or none of us have - just because you don’t ‘want’ certain people to have human rights doesn’t mean you should scrap the whole thing and lose the rights yourself - talk about cutting your nose to spite your face.

indeed. you need to look at how each country has ratified it and incorporated it into their laws.

Anyone who omits to mention the domestic law that flows from the treaty obligations is either ignorant of how treaty obligations are carried out, or is seeking to misrepresent

You will when your rights are being violated and there is no recourse. There will always be individuals who commit horrible acts, but the removal of the human rights act will leave us open to violations by the state. Do you trust that the government will only use that for good?

That's not actually true though.

The right to life implies certain positive obligations on the State. These include obligations to conduct an investigation into an unlawful death, notify potential victims if the state becomes aware of threats to their life (Osman warnings). These rights derive from the ECHR.

Bill of Human Rights Bill has been pulled from second reading for a full review and rewrite.
Thank Goodness! A bill that allowed so many caveats was ripe for abuse.

The ECHR was the target of a dirty protest by a group called Pissed Off Trannies yesterday. They were protesting against the EHRC's ruling on women's rights to single sex spaces. Do not open the link if you're eating lunch. www.vice.com/en/article/jgpj5y/pissed-off-trannies-ehrc-protest