Human Rights

[Dave2002]

From the BBC news site "Mrs May says she is determined to scrap the Human Rights Act. She also says "nothing should be off the table" in terms of the European Convention on Human Rights, and that her Party will consider this and set out a plan before the next election."

I think Mrs May is completely out of order here.

[amateur51]

From the BBC news site "Mrs May says she is determined to scrap the Human Rights Act. She also says "nothing should be off the table" in terms of the European Convention on Human Rights, and that her Party will consider this and set out a plan before the next election."

I think Mrs May is completely out of order here.

Mrs May is very keen to be the next Prime Minister. She is echoing popular sentiment. Go figure

[Dave2002]

Mrs May is very keen to be the next Prime Minister. She is echoing popular sentiment. Go figure

Heaven help us! I'd rather stick with Cameron, even though I hope we don't have to. I may be misguided, but at least I don't think Cameron is evil.

[Pabmusic]

Repealing the Human Rights Act would be stupid, but would not affect much. UK citizens would have to wait until they'd exhausted UK procedures before bringing a case in the ECHR. Before the Human Rights Act, that delay was about seven years.

Withdrawing from the treaty itself would be a hugely bigger step - we were one of the founder members in 1950 (indeed we drafted it!). It we withdrew, we would become the only European country, with the exception of Belarus (which has never accepted it) that does not accept the treaty. And because we have no straightforward constitution that can be invoked to declare a government act illegal, we would be completely at the mercy of government whims.

Good idea!

[amateur51]

Heaven help us! I'd rather stick with Cameron, even though I hope we don't have to. I may be misguided, but at least I don't think Cameron is evil.

Cameron is dealing with realpolitik and so was May in all her negotiations over Abu Qatada. In suggesting this plan, Mrs May is positioning herself within the Tory Party. The reality may prove very different.

And anyway, she can always blame any back-tracking on those tricky furriners.

[Beef Oven]

From the BBC news site "Mrs May says she is determined to scrap the Human Rights Act. She also says "nothing should be off the table" in terms of the European Convention on Human Rights, and that her Party will consider this and set out a plan before the next election."

I think Mrs May is completely out of order here.

She is only making such noises in order to consolidate base support within the Conservative Party. If push came to shove, she wouldn't have the balls. Nothing much to worry about here - just the normal rhetoric of career politicians.

[Mr Pee]

The usual predictable bleating from Guardian land. It is clearly absurd that it has taken so long to rid the UK of the vile specimen that is Abu Qatada. The human rights act should not be immune from reform or repeal if it has failed to keep pace with modern realities. May is simply suggesting that it might be time to re-examine it.

[french frank]

The usual predictable bleating from Guardian land. It is clearly absurd that it has taken so long to rid the UK of the vile specimen that is Abu Qatada. The human rights act should not be immune from reform or repeal if it has failed to keep pace with modern realities. May is simply suggesting that it might be time to re-examine it.

Not absurd. In the end it resulted in Jordan getting its own act together. Slow and steady wins the race in this case.

[eighthobstruction]

Once again....NOT in manifesto....no mandate to make any considerable changes to basic human rights....

.....Bleat bleat....better than baa baa baa baa (surely)....

[Pabmusic]

The usual predictable bleating from Guardian land. It is clearly absurd that it has taken so long to rid the UK of the vile specimen that is Abu Qatada. The human rights act should not be immune from reform or repeal if it has failed to keep pace with modern realities. May is simply suggesting that it might be time to re-examine it.

The Human Rights Act says very little about human rights. It simply allows British courts to apply the provisions of the ECHR themselves. The former position was that UK citizens had to exhaust all internal procedures before they could approach the ECHR - something that usually took about seven years. That's all it is.

What May wants to do - perhaps (I do not know) - is withdraw from the ECHR itself because she doesn't like being ruled against. That would be utterly shameful and somewhat dangerous since we (almost uniquely) have no constitutional right to challenge any law or government action. I have already posted a complete list of cases taken to the ECHR from the UK, and it's a bit surprising just how ordinary it is. It make one wonder whether she wants a system in which the government can do as it wants without challenge. If that were to happen, it would give the government more power than any 'democratic' government in the world.

By the way, I rarely see the Guardian.

[mercia]

£1.7 million-worth of steadiness

[MrGongGong]

Don't be daft 8th
we ALL know who the baddies are
and they should be strapped down and waterboarded
"nothing to hide, nothing to fear" ........

[aeolium]

The Human Rights Act says very little about human rights. It simply allows British courts to apply the provisions of the ECHR themselves. The former position was that UK citizens had to exhaust all internal procedures before they could approach the ECHR - something that usually took about seven years. That's all it is.

What May wants to do - perhaps (I do not know) - is withdraw from the ECHR itself because she doesn't like being ruled against. That would be utterly shameful and somewhat dangerous since we (almost uniquely) have no constitutional right to challenge any law or government action. I have already posted a complete list of cases taken to the ECHR from the UK, and it's a bit surprising just how ordinary it is. It make one wonder whether she wants a system in which the government can do as it wants without challenge. If that were to happen, it would give the government more power than any 'democratic' government in the world.

Absolutely right. It is almost as though May - and others within the Conservative party - are advocating some kind of immunity from international law so as to have unfettered power over British citizens. And this is from a party that has not even secured a majority of seats (far less a majority of votes) in the current parliament!

[Bryn]

Not absurd. In the end it resulted in Jordan getting its own act together. Slow and steady wins the race in this case.

Quite! Though May may not have intended such, the outcome could well be a progressive development for the Jordanian justice system in a more general sense.

[french frank]

£1.7 million-worth of steadiness

Peanuts - is that really all it cost??? The BBC has just frittered away £100m of public money on the DMI. And another £25m in 'severance pay' to senior managers.