Abu quatada

[badgerx16]

 

Oh, WTF has this to do with the Empire ?

 

About as much as the Qatada case has to do with the EU.

[Frank's cousin]

Alps, the point is that the Human Rights ACT has feck all to do with the EU - it predates it and we were part instigators - something of which we should be proud. Don't get this confused with the the EU.

 

Yes, folk can appeal to the ECHR if they want to after a national judgement, which is good but in this case as Badger has frequently pointed out, the reason this guy is still here is because the Governments Lawyers could not prove that evidence obtained by torture would not be used agaisnt him if sent back. A judgement made by a British Judge based on British legislation that WE devised. If you dont like the EU, fine, but it has feck all to do with this case.

 

Too often things like this are used to batter the EU, when it has feck all to do with it - its symptomatic of teh the anti-EU press ofetn deliberatly relating or confusing the issue. Its why a referendum in this country on EU memebership would be a farce, as too many cant differentiate between these things hcih are often highly emotive...

[Viking Warrior]

The European Convention on Human Rights was drafted in the 1950s as a response to fascism. Each right arose, phoenix-like, as a rejection of a particular evil. The ECHR enshrined classic common law rights such as the right to be treated humanely and to a fair trial. It also included rights that were responses to particular fascist evils, such as the right not to have family or religious life interfered with by the state.

[Faz]

Could someone please explain to me how, as a law abiding citizen of this country, I benefit from the HRA?

 

It seems to me that, for the most part, I need to have either arrived here illegally, or have committed or be accused of committing a crime.... or both. It would also help if I didn't have any visible means of supporting myself or my family. Or so it would seem.

[Thedelldays]

We are free to deport criminals. It's just that certain standards have to be met. If you believe in human rights, then you have to apply them to everyone, regardless of whether they are nice people or not.

 

I kind of like the ECHR. It's good to have that outside protection. What we do need is a proper supreme court like the US.

outside protection from whom..?

[Monk]

Simple: hang, draw and quarter the nobber.

[the stain]

Could someone please explain to me how, as a law abiding citizen of this country, I benefit from the HRA?

 

It seems to me that, for the most part, I need to have either arrived here illegally, or have committed or be accused of committing a crime.... or both. It would also help if I didn't have any visible means of supporting myself or my family. Or so it would seem.

 

You benefit in a number of ways, but as we live in a democratic country most of the benefits won't necessarily apply to you. However, your bit about only benefitting if you were "accused of committing a crime" is important - what if you were innocent? It's nice to know your rights would be protected.

Sometimes, even in this country, the police and the government act in ways which mean citizens are not always treated fairly.

 

Anyway, here is a list of benefits that the HRA provides for you:

 

• The right to life – protects your life, by law. The state is required to investigate suspicious deaths and deaths in custody.
  
• The prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment – you should never be tortured or treated in an inhuman or degrading way, no matter what the situation.
  
• Protection against slavery and forced labour – you should not be treated like a slave or subjected to forced labour.
  
• The right to liberty and freedom – you have the right to be free and the state can only imprison you with very good reason – for example, if you are convicted of a crime.
  
• The right to a fair trial and no punishment without law - you are innocent until proven guilty. If accused of a crime, you have the right to hear the evidence against you, in a court of law.
  
• Respect for privacy and family life and the right to marry – protects against unnecessary surveillance or intrusion into your life. You have the right to marry and raise a family.
  
• Freedom of thought, religion and belief – you can believe what you like and practise your religion or beliefs.
  
• Free speech and peaceful protest – you have a right to speak freely and join with others peacefully, to express your views.
  
• No discrimination – everyone’s rights are equal. You should not be treated unfairly – because, for example, of your gender, race, sexuality, religion or age.
  
• Protection of property, the right to an education and the right to free elections – protects against state interference with your possessions; means that no child can be denied an education and that elections must be free and fair
  

 

That seems like a worthy list and I cannot see why anyone would object to those aims. It may not always work out exactly as we would like, but nothing is perfect and we shouldn't let one or two cock ups diminish the good the act does.

 

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

 

• 
  

[alpine_saint]

You benefit in a number of ways, but as we live in a democratic country most of the benefits won't necessarily apply to you. However, your bit about only benefitting if you were "accused of committing a crime" is important - what if you were innocent? It's nice to know your rights would be protected.

Sometimes, even in this country, the police and the government act in ways which mean citizens are not always treated fairly.

 

Anyway, here is a list of benefits that the HRA provides for you:

 

• The right to life – protects your life, by law. The state is required to investigate suspicious deaths and deaths in custody.
  
• The prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment – you should never be tortured or treated in an inhuman or degrading way, no matter what the situation.
  
• Protection against slavery and forced labour – you should not be treated like a slave or subjected to forced labour.
  
• The right to liberty and freedom – you have the right to be free and the state can only imprison you with very good reason – for example, if you are convicted of a crime.
  
• The right to a fair trial and no punishment without law - you are innocent until proven guilty. If accused of a crime, you have the right to hear the evidence against you, in a court of law.
  
• Respect for privacy and family life and the right to marry – protects against unnecessary surveillance or intrusion into your life. You have the right to marry and raise a family.
  
• Freedom of thought, religion and belief – you can believe what you like and practise your religion or beliefs.
  
• Free speech and peaceful protest – you have a right to speak freely and join with others peacefully, to express your views.
  
• No discrimination – everyone’s rights are equal. You should not be treated unfairly – because, for example, of your gender, race, sexuality, religion or age.
  
• Protection of property, the right to an education and the right to free elections – protects against state interference with your possessions; means that no child can be denied an education and that elections must be free and fair
  

 

That seems like a worthy list and I cannot see why anyone would object to those aims. It may not always work out exactly as we would like, but nothing is perfect and we shouldn't let one or two cock ups diminish the good the act does.

 

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

 

• 
  

 

So what should we do with people like Qatada that come to the UK under false pretences and seek to deny some of those rights to those of us who are citizens or have legitimate grounds for being in the UK ? The rest of us have rights too.

 

I can answer that one for you: boot them out.

[pap]

So what should we do with people like Qatada that come to the UK under false pretences and seek to deny some of those rights to those of us who are citizens or have legitimate grounds for being in the UK ? The rest of us have rights too.

 

I can answer that one for you: boot them out.

 

Cost of doing business in a liberal democracy.

 

If we have to suffer the exception so that the rule is fair treatment for everyone, happy enough with that.

[the stain]

So what should we do with people like Qatada that come to the UK under false pretences and seek to deny some of those rights to those of us who are citizens or have legitimate grounds for being in the UK ? The rest of us have rights too.

 

I can answer that one for you: boot them out.

 

So you're going to ask me a question and then answer it yourself?

 

No one is saying that "the rest of us" don't have rights.

 

Do you not agree that the list that I posted includes some very worthy aims? Or are you not that bothered about protecting "The right to a fair trial and no punishment without law"?

Would you rather we get rid of these rights in order to seek justice against one person? You'd forgo all the benefits for all the citizens of the country to exact revenge against one person? I think that would be very short sighted.

No system is perfect and pap is exactly right in what he says.

[badgerx16]

If Teresa May hadn't miscalculated the date of the expiry of his European appeal period in April, he'd have been long gone.

[Window Cleaner]

The answer is perfectly simple. The government should employ him as an intercommunal advisor and immediately send him on a fact finding mission to Gaza. I think we could count on the West's Guard Dog to do the rest.

[Thedelldays]

If Teresa May hadn't miscalculated the date of the expiry of his European appeal period in April, he'd have been long gone.

he should be long gone...regardless of any european appeal

[Window Cleaner]

he should be long gone...regardless of any european appeal

 

In fact the fact that he isn't "gone" probably means someone somewhere has reason for him not to be.

[View From The Top]

Personally, despite my liberal leanings, I'd prefer the 9mm option for this chap.

[Window Cleaner]

Personally, despite my liberal leanings, I'd prefer the 9mm option for this chap.

 

 

Much too crude, what's wrong with the good old Thalium umbrella spike ?

[CB Saint]

You benefit in a number of ways, but as we live in a democratic country most of the benefits won't necessarily apply to you. However, your bit about only benefitting if you were "accused of committing a crime" is important - what if you were innocent? It's nice to know your rights would be protected.

Sometimes, even in this country, the police and the government act in ways which mean citizens are not always treated fairly.

 

Anyway, here is a list of benefits that the HRA provides for you:

 

• The right to life – protects your life, by law. The state is required to investigate suspicious deaths and deaths in custody.
  
• The prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment – you should never be tortured or treated in an inhuman or degrading way, no matter what the situation.
  
• Protection against slavery and forced labour – you should not be treated like a slave or subjected to forced labour.
  
• The right to liberty and freedom – you have the right to be free and the state can only imprison you with very good reason – for example, if you are convicted of a crime.
  
• The right to a fair trial and no punishment without law - you are innocent until proven guilty. If accused of a crime, you have the right to hear the evidence against you, in a court of law.
  
• Respect for privacy and family life and the right to marry – protects against unnecessary surveillance or intrusion into your life. You have the right to marry and raise a family.
  
• Freedom of thought, religion and belief – you can believe what you like and practise your religion or beliefs.
  
• Free speech and peaceful protest – you have a right to speak freely and join with others peacefully, to express your views.
  
• No discrimination – everyone’s rights are equal. You should not be treated unfairly – because, for example, of your gender, race, sexuality, religion or age.
  
• Protection of property, the right to an education and the right to free elections – protects against state interference with your possessions; means that no child can be denied an education and that elections must be free and fair
  

 

That seems like a worthy list and I cannot see why anyone would object to those aims. It may not always work out exactly as we would like, but nothing is perfect and we shouldn't let one or two cock ups diminish the good the act does.

 

Perhaps we should adjust the act so that your entitlement to these rights (or some of them) only exists if you do not present a risk to the human rights of others.

[View From The Top]

Much too crude, what's wrong with the good old Thalium umbrella spike ?

 

Prefer the raw violence of my option for this chap. Nothing subtle & with time enough for him to register his end of days.

[Sour Mash]

You benefit in a number of ways, but as we live in a democratic country most of the benefits won't necessarily apply to you. However, your bit about only benefitting if you were "accused of committing a crime" is important - what if you were innocent? It's nice to know your rights would be protected.

Sometimes, even in this country, the police and the government act in ways which mean citizens are not always treated fairly.

 

Anyway, here is a list of benefits that the HRA provides for you:

 

• The right to life – protects your life, by law. The state is required to investigate suspicious deaths and deaths in custody.
  
• The prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment – you should never be tortured or treated in an inhuman or degrading way, no matter what the situation.
  
• Protection against slavery and forced labour – you should not be treated like a slave or subjected to forced labour.
  
• The right to liberty and freedom – you have the right to be free and the state can only imprison you with very good reason – for example, if you are convicted of a crime.
  
• The right to a fair trial and no punishment without law - you are innocent until proven guilty. If accused of a crime, you have the right to hear the evidence against you, in a court of law.
  
• Respect for privacy and family life and the right to marry – protects against unnecessary surveillance or intrusion into your life. You have the right to marry and raise a family.
  
• Freedom of thought, religion and belief – you can believe what you like and practise your religion or beliefs.
  
• Free speech and peaceful protest – you have a right to speak freely and join with others peacefully, to express your views.
  
• No discrimination – everyone’s rights are equal. You should not be treated unfairly – because, for example, of your gender, race, sexuality, religion or age.
  
• Protection of property, the right to an education and the right to free elections – protects against state interference with your possessions; means that no child can be denied an education and that elections must be free and fair
  

 

That seems like a worthy list and I cannot see why anyone would object to those aims. It may not always work out exactly as we would like, but nothing is perfect and we shouldn't let one or two cock ups diminish the good the act does.

 

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

 

• 
  

 

What on that list wasn't already in place in the UK before the HRA?

[Saintandy666]

Perhaps we should adjust the act so that your entitlement to these rights (or some of them) only exists if you do not present a risk to the human rights of others.

 

That destroys the whole point of human rights. They are universal, because you are human. If you just let a state decide who has human rights and who doesn't, it's a very slippery slope.

[Saintandy666]

What on that list wasn't already in place in the UK before the HRA?

 

All of it was in place via the ECHR. The HRA was enacted to bring the ECHR to the UK in effect. So now people don't have to go to Strasbourg, they can go to London first...

[Thedelldays]

All of it was in place via the ECHR. The HRA was enacted to bring the ECHR to the UK in effect. So now people don't have to go to Strasbourg, they can go to London first...

can we not have all that list but the freedom to kick out known preachers of hate, death and violence...oh, and terrorists..?

 

is that so wrong..?

[Sour Mash]

All of it was in place via the ECHR. The HRA was enacted to bring the ECHR to the UK in effect. So now people don't have to go to Strasbourg, they can go to London first...

You haven't answered/understood my question.

[badgerx16]

can we not have all that list but the freedom to kick out known preachers of hate, death and violence...oh, and terrorists..?

 

is that so wrong..?

 

Not at all, all we need is legislation that permits us to do it. Assuming, that is, that you wish to continue to operate under British Law ? The Legal Eagles get rich interpreting the rules that Parliament lays down - if there is a loophole it is Parliament's job to close it.

[badgerx16]

What on that list wasn't already in place in the UK before the HRA?

 

In terms of UK Law a lot of it only existed in Common Law rather than primary legislation. The 1950 European Convention enabled people to go to Strasbourg to appeal against judgements in the UK, and quite often get them overturned as the European Court was viewed as being the higher authority. The HRAct put in place the framework to enable UK courts to become the principal, and also put the 'Rights' into primary statute.

 

http://www.lawobserver.co.uk/human_rights_2_32.html

[Viking Warrior]

Unfortunately we are stuck with the HRA for now.

 

I have had some disgruntled employees quoting human rights abuses re employment matters. More a threat than anything serious. but there were some employees somewhere in the UK that use the clause about forced labour becuase the supervisor or manager ordered the workers to do some work instead of sitting about smoking etc. It was rightly thrown out but it did cost the company a few bob defending and getting clarification on their claims.