oowee Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 This from a recent BASC posting on protecting shooting. Given the SSPCA’s longstanding and publicly stated opposition towards shooting, BASC has concerns that this could lead to biased investigations, compromising the fundamental rights under Article 8 and Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). BASC fears that SSPCA’s actions might lead to unsafe convictions due to its ideological stance. Some on here want out of the ECHR. I wonder how many of our basic rights are protected through it. Baby and bath water? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 11 minutes ago, oowee said: This from a recent BASC posting on protecting shooting. Given the SSPCA’s longstanding and publicly stated opposition towards shooting, BASC has concerns that this could lead to biased investigations, compromising the fundamental rights under Article 8 and Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). BASC fears that SSPCA’s actions might lead to unsafe convictions due to its ideological stance. Some on here want out of the ECHR. I wonder how many of our basic rights are protected through it. Baby and bath water? Do you not think the uk is capable of making laws to protect rights? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted June 19 Author Report Share Posted June 19 26 minutes ago, welsh1 said: Do you not think the uk is capable of making laws to protect rights? We did its called the ECHR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 11 minutes ago, oowee said: We did its called the ECHR. That wasn't the question, let me rephrase, "do you not think the uk is capable of making its own laws to protect rights." Bearing in mind that you agree we are capable of making laws to protect rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 Just to be straight, the ECHR does not make laws, it has no ability or remit to make laws. It is a glorified magistrates court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 1 hour ago, welsh1 said: Do you not think the uk is capable of making laws to protect rights? +1 The ECHR is a bloated, out of date peice of legislation that was made long before the modern problems of mass migration, modern hate speech laws, foreign born terrorist ideology and many other issues that it is utterly ineffective at dealing with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted June 19 Author Report Share Posted June 19 59 minutes ago, welsh1 said: That wasn't the question, let me rephrase, "do you not think the uk is capable of making its own laws to protect rights." Bearing in mind that you agree we are capable of making laws to protect rights. 22 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said: +1 The ECHR is a bloated, out of date peice of legislation that was made long before the modern problems of mass migration, modern hate speech laws, foreign born terrorist ideology and many other issues that it is utterly ineffective at dealing with. The UK made the conventions that form ECHR. We can clearly make whatever laws we wish. In any proposal to withdraw from ECHR surely the first question must be what conventions we want to see removed from the public. It's another debate where people are against something but unable to say what they want to replace it with. Very similar to the recent referendum. We don't like it, we don't know why but we want out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pushandpull Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 There is a little bit of confusion in this thread between the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court which ultimately interprets it. (The Strasbourg Court). The ECHR was incorporated into our national law by the Human Rights Act of 1998. If you are going to criticise, please inform yourself properly by reading these fully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 43 minutes ago, oowee said: The UK made the conventions that form ECHR. We can clearly make whatever laws we wish. In any proposal to withdraw from ECHR surely the first question must be what conventions we want to see removed from the public. Do you not think there is enough common and statutory law to protect people WITHOUT the ECHR ? 2 hours ago, oowee said: Some on here want out of the ECHR. I wonder how many of our basic rights are protected through it. Baby and bath water? I would counter that NONE of our 'basic' rights are compromised if the ECHR is removed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoli 12 guage Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said: +1 The ECHR is a bloated, out of date peice of legislation that was made long before the modern problems of mass migration, modern hate speech laws, foreign born terrorist ideology and many other issues that it is utterly ineffective at dealing with. +2 these laws were made to protect displaced persons, affected, predominantly by the WW2 and the Nazis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted June 19 Author Report Share Posted June 19 9 minutes ago, Rewulf said: Do you not think there is enough common and statutory law to protect people WITHOUT the ECHR ? I would counter that NONE of our 'basic' rights are compromised if the ECHR is removed. So no point leaving then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 1 hour ago, oowee said: The UK made the conventions that form ECHR. We can clearly make whatever laws we wish. In any proposal to withdraw from ECHR surely the first question must be what conventions we want to see removed from the public. It's another debate where people are against something but unable to say what they want to replace it with. Very similar to the recent referendum. We don't like it, we don't know why but we want out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights So you are saying that even though we were a leading proponent of the ECHR because we could see it was needed at the time that we should not move forward. Surely a country as clever as ours who instigated the ECHR can see that it may no longer be fit for purpose and that we should withdraw and develop our own laws and legislation. There is little point in staying within an organisation that is no longer seen fit for purpose by many and it's original ideal has long gone. while the uk may be part of europe we are not part of the eu. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 1 hour ago, oowee said: The UK made the conventions that form ECHR. We can clearly make whatever laws we wish. In any proposal to withdraw from ECHR surely the first question must be what conventions we want to see removed from the public. It's another debate where people are against something but unable to say what they want to replace it with. Very similar to the recent referendum. We don't like it, we don't know why but we want out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights The general public don't need to be experts to know somethings broken and that they don't want something, that's for government and it's advisers to deliver on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 29 minutes ago, oowee said: 39 minutes ago, Rewulf said: I would counter that NONE of our 'basic' rights are compromised if the ECHR is removed. So no point leaving then. The other side of the coin is, Are some of our basic rights compromised BECAUSE of the ECHR ? If you dont see the connection I can help you, but I think you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellow Bear Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 2 minutes ago, Rewulf said: The other side of the coin is, Are some of our basic rights ARE compromised BECAUSE of the ECHR ? If you don't see the connection I can help you, but I think you do. IMHO it needed a small change Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 Just now, Yellow Bear said: IMHO it needed a small change Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
udderlyoffroad Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 The problem is not with the court - it's not some hard right wing position, many experienced legal professionals are in agreement that the court regularly massively exceeds its remit and the convention itself is dated. So how do other countries get around this? They ignore the rulings if not convenient to them. Of course, being British we can't do this. Hence the suggestion to leave and have a modern bill of rights. So, per my question in the other thread, who really is the pariah state, the one following the rulings who wants to leave, or the ones just ignoring the rulings and paying lip service to being a proud member of the ECHR? Incidentally, the same logic with the avalanche of EU directives was the reason that many, many business owners wanted to leave the EU, but that's another topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.