Theresa May wants to scrap the human rights act

[electra]

I heard this on radio 4 at the weekend.

Apparently it's something to do with 'foreigners taking advantage' - wow the tories have a nice way of sounding prejudiced against just about anyone don't they?

Also, should point out that Civilised Societies are generally defined by the way that they treat their citizens. By, for example, providing them with...

Right to life
Freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment
Right to liberty and security
Freedom from slavery and forced labour
Right to a fair trial
No punishment without law
Respect for your private and family life, home and correspondence
Freedom of thought, belief and religion
Freedom of expression
Freedom of assembly and association
Right to marry and start a family
Protection from discrimination in respect of these these rights and freedoms
Right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
Right to education
Right to participate in free elections

Just a thought.

If this is specifically a problem in the UK, maybe we need to look at how other countries are interpreting the HRA to see what the difference is?

I suspect the people who are deciding violent criminals cannot be deported may be the same "jobsworths" who think Health & Safety legislation means nobody can make their own decisions any more, or that "Religious Discrimination" laws mean councils can't send Christmas cards.

I don't care where a criminal was born. What's important in my view is that they are judged fairly by the law and do their time.

Anyone who thinks the tories want to scrap the human rights act just to get rid of foreign criminals are naive and short sighted.

Quite, babyheave

Taken out of context I'm 99.9% sure.

Perhaps she wishes to do away with the examples of "foreign" men who mow down children in their uninsured, unlicensed, untaxed cars but cannot be deported because it's agains their human rights. Or perhaps rapists.

Life isn't black & white.

I personally prefer to support the rights of the indigenous population of the UK.

Electra, you are very short sighted and naive.

I simply want those who uphold the law to be given human rights.

Electra - why can't someone be deported to Italy? Why is it against his human rights to not be sent back to an EU country?

'indigenous'?? Who knew we have been infiltrated by the BNP??

WTF does indigenous actually mean anyway. What a loads of bolleaux.

Prisoners have complained about having just one sky sports channel as it is against their human rights.

What a fucking joke!

Anyone who thinks the tories want to scrap the human rights act just to get rid of foreign criminals are naive and short sighted.

That's what I said in my earlier post, but it is still true that some of the laws are misused.

As for the automatic right to stay in the uk if you commit a crime here that is just mad. (that's not what the law says, but in practice..)

Electra - you are trying to debate an argument but don't know what indigenous mean!

Indigenous people are those native to a country whose culture has formed as a result. An easy example is aboriginies are indigenous to Australia. Or Christians are indigenous to Great Britain.

For a start, the HRA was bringing EU law into effect in the UK - this has to happen with every regulation and directive originating from the EU as that's how the UK legal system works. Until the HRA was brought in, the UK was the country with the most referrals to the ECHR (mostly relating to treatment of Irish terror suspects and the right to privacy - there's a very famous case where the post office was tapping someone's phone, and there was absolutely nothing illegal about it).

The rights enshrined in it are based on the EU legislation, which is based on international Human Rights law.

I find a lot of the complaints about the HRA are through ignorance. The Act itself it's very dry - it's about the procedures on how institutions found to be violating the act should be dealt with (individuals aren't culpable for now).

but anyways, I'm sure a much more knowledgable MNer will come along in a minute and explain it all.

IMO though, the Tories had better in a pretty spectacular replacement; before there was nothing, nada. Those rights listed above were only protected if they were incidentally covered by another law. Not a good state to be in.

What about the composition of the European Court of Human Rights?

Do you know that even San Marino gets a place at the table? And do you know that their representative was a television hostess who did a 2-year law course?

electra the first white people to America committed atrocities against the indigenous people.

Are you saying the American Indians were in the wrong then?

There is no such thing as an indigenous Briton - british people come from everywhere.

Only ignorant people refer to others as 'scum' so I'd say you need to look at your own debating techniques.

I have a friend who used the Act to force the state to provide an education for her severely disabled child.

It might be sold as about criminals, it won't be those that end up stuffed. Want a statement? why bother, we closed down the specialist schools ages ago.

Anyone who has a problem with that is covered (as opposed to the way it is abused by a few Lawyers perhaps) is inherently wrong. Address the abuses, keep the Act.

I thought prisoners who were not UK citizens were already deported at the end of their sentences unless they can prove that they would be tortured / killed / imprisoned unfairly in the country the were being deported to?

"Or Christians are indigenous to Great Britain"

Eh? Are you on crack?

Human rights are not only used by "foreigners", they're used to protect many vunerable people in our country.

Hence the Tories wanting to get rid. Just like the unions, who stand up for the rights of workers (wonder why there are very few unions for private sector unions, hence their shitty pensions for example). The Tories don't like them. It's all about big business and big corporations.

electra you must be very young. Everyone comes from somewhere else. look up 'evolution' next.

Well, obviously its only them dirty forriners that do nasty things.

Oh wait, no its not.

And from the horse's mouth " who perhaps are terrorist suspects" - even though they are a suspect - not a convicted criminal? I hope all the people who are bleating about getting rid of human rights are happy to be treated as guilty without trial.

DawnDonna - i think your post summed it up best.

And why are people obsessing on removing terror suspects? I'm more concerned about what this government thinks it can do to the populace, particularly the weakest. And pulling out of EU/HRA will give them the free reign they haven't had so far.

The sort of language some of you are using can be found frequently within the policies of the BNP.

Electra - indigenous people refers to those who make up the culture of a country historically. Therefore, inidginous people of GB are Christians. Google the word if you can't understand it.

People who kill others, unless in self defence are scum.

Bramshott yes that's true, but suddenly it seems they can all show that they might be mistreated.

It's not so much the law as the poor way it is applied.

Gosh, I've been waiting all my life for the erudite remarks of someone like onagar.