'uman rights

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
Post Reply
User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33646
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

'uman rights

Post by Gob »

The Conservatives have described their plans to stop British laws being overruled by human rights judgements from Strasbourg as "viable and legal".

Justice Secretary Chris Grayling said if the Tories won the 2015 election, a new Bill of Rights would give UK courts and Parliament the "final say".

There should be no "legal blank cheque to take human rights into areas where they have never applied", he added.

But former Attorney General Dominic Grieve said the plans were flawed.

The Tory MP said they would be "difficult to implement" and risked "undermining" the UK's - and his own party's - tradition of upholding human rights.

Labour and the Lib Dems have said the proposals are politically motivated while the UK Independence Party claimed they were "worthless".

The Conservatives have pledged for a decade to scrap the 1998 Human Rights Act, introduced under the Labour government, which incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights into British law.

PDF download Conservatives' human rights proposals[221 KB]

In his speech to the Conservative conference on Wednesday, David Cameron said if his party formed the next government, it would replace the Human Rights Act with a British Bill of Rights and Responsibilities.


The Tories have also said they would be prepared to exercise their right to withdraw from the European Convention if Parliament and the British courts could not veto laws from applying to the UK.

The Council of Europe, comprising European Convention member states, said it was "inconceivable" that the UK, as a founding member, could leave.
Ten cases where criminals made a mockery out of justice


KILLER DRIVER: Iraqi Aso Mohammed Ibrahim left 12-year-old Amy Houston to die ‘like a dog’ under the wheels of his car after knocking her down in Blackburn in 2003 while banned from driving. Twice refused asylum, he was never removed by the Home Office and after the killing, was allowed to stay in the UK after serving a mere four months in jail because he had fathered two children here, which judges ruled gave him a right to a ‘family life’. David Cameron wrote to Amy’s father Paul in 2010 pledging to abolish the Human Rights Act and ensure rights were ‘better balanced against responsibilities’.

RAPIST: William Danga was jailed for ten years for raping a 16-year-old girl. The 40-year-old Congolese asylum seeker, who raped and molested two young girls while fighting deportation after his release and is now serving a 15-year sentence, used the fact he has two children to stay in Britain.

WAR CRIMES SUSPECT: Serb Milan Sarcevic was accused of involvement in the 1991 Vukovar massacre of up to 300 men and women. The wounded Croat victims were beaten, executed and buried in a mass grave. A judge ruled evidence of his involvement was ‘not conclusive’ and did not warrant breaching his ‘strong family life’. The 62-year-old lives on a council estate in South-East London with his wife, daughter and granddaughter.

MURDERER: Kirk Dickson was given the right to become a father from behind bars. A 2007 ruling by the European Court of Human Rights allowed him to participate in artificial insemination treatment from inside prison. Another application by a further, unnamed inmate was approved in 2011 and several other applications have been made.

RAPIST: Mustafa Abdullahi – who held a knife to a pregnant woman’s throat as he raped her – was given permission to stay in Britain in December 2013 because of his family rights. The 31-year-old Somali failed asylum seeker was jailed for ten years in 2007 and ordered to be deported but immigration judges said it would breach his family rights – even though he does not have a wife or children in Britain – because his mother and other family members live in the UK.

VIOLENT MOTHER: A Bangladeshi woman jailed for five years for stabbing her baby daughter with a kitchen knife in East London in 2009 won the right to stay in Britain so she could rebuild her relationship with the child.

ROBBER: A Sri Lankan jailed for robbery in 2008 was allowed to stay as he had a long-term girlfriend. The 22-year-old’s lawyer argued he had ‘established a private and family life’.

RAPIST: Nigerian Akindoyin Akinshipe, 24, escaped deportation in 2011 when judges ruled he had a right to a private life here even though he has no wife or children. He had been jailed for raping a girl of 13 when he was 15.

BURGLAR: Wayne Bishop, 33, from Clifton, Nottinghamshire, was let out of prison in May 2011 after just one month of an eight month sentence so he could look after his five children on the grounds their rights were more important than those of his victims.

SEX OFFENDER: Mohammed Kendeh escaped removal to Sierra Leone despite convictions for robbery, burglary, arson and assaults on 11 women. An immigration judge ruled in 2007 that as Kendeh, 24, came to Britain aged six, and had almost no family in West Africa, he had effectively become ‘one of us’.

“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 20047
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: 'uman rights

Post by BoSoxGal »

The UK has gone odd.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: 'uman rights

Post by Lord Jim »

In his speech to the Conservative conference on Wednesday, David Cameron said if his party formed the next government, it would replace the Human Rights Act with a British Bill of Rights and Responsibilities.
Sounds like a grand idea Dave, but you've been in office for four years....Why haven't you put this up before now?

And how's that re-negociation of Britain's status in the EU going? You know, the platform you ran on the last time? Oh right, I forgot; it hasn't even started yet...

It seems like Cameron prefers to run on doing things rather than actually doing them...

I have to say that if I were a UK citizen I would be pretty damn frustrated...

My choices in the next election seem to boil down to this:

One party (the Conservatives) that talks about doing the right things, but never actually does them...

A second party (Labour) that's completely opposed to doing the right things...

And a third party, (The Ukip) that would actually do the right things, but hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of forming the government...

That's a menu of options that's almost as appealing as what we get over here... 8-)
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33646
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: 'uman rights

Post by Gob »

You forgot the Lib Dems.

But there again, so does everyone else.....
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: 'uman rights

Post by Lord Jim »

You're right; sorry:

A fourth party, the Liberal Democrats, that doesn't know what it wants to do, which is okay because it hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of forming the government either.
Last edited by Lord Jim on Mon Oct 06, 2014 3:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ImageImageImage

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: 'uman rights

Post by rubato »

Gob wrote:
Ten cases where criminals made a mockery out of justice


KILLER DRIVER: Iraqi Aso Mohammed Ibrahim left 12-year-old Amy Houston to die ‘like a dog’ under the wheels of his car after knocking her down in Blackburn in 2003 while banned from driving. Twice refused asylum, he was never removed by the Home Office and after the killing, was allowed to stay in the UK after serving a mere four months in jail because he had fathered two children here, which judges ruled gave him a right to a ‘family life’. David Cameron wrote to Amy’s father Paul in 2010 pledging to abolish the Human Rights Act and ensure rights were ‘better balanced against responsibilities’.

RAPIST: William Danga was jailed for ten years for raping a 16-year-old girl. The 40-year-old Congolese asylum seeker, who raped and molested two young girls while fighting deportation after his release and is now serving a 15-year sentence, used the fact he has two children to stay in Britain.

WAR CRIMES SUSPECT: Serb Milan Sarcevic was accused of involvement in the 1991 Vukovar massacre of up to 300 men and women. The wounded Croat victims were beaten, executed and buried in a mass grave. A judge ruled evidence of his involvement was ‘not conclusive’ and did not warrant breaching his ‘strong family life’. The 62-year-old lives on a council estate in South-East London with his wife, daughter and granddaughter.

MURDERER: Kirk Dickson was given the right to become a father from behind bars. A 2007 ruling by the European Court of Human Rights allowed him to participate in artificial insemination treatment from inside prison. Another application by a further, unnamed inmate was approved in 2011 and several other applications have been made.

RAPIST: Mustafa Abdullahi – who held a knife to a pregnant woman’s throat as he raped her – was given permission to stay in Britain in December 2013 because of his family rights. The 31-year-old Somali failed asylum seeker was jailed for ten years in 2007 and ordered to be deported but immigration judges said it would breach his family rights – even though he does not have a wife or children in Britain – because his mother and other family members live in the UK.

VIOLENT MOTHER: A Bangladeshi woman jailed for five years for stabbing her baby daughter with a kitchen knife in East London in 2009 won the right to stay in Britain so she could rebuild her relationship with the child.

ROBBER: A Sri Lankan jailed for robbery in 2008 was allowed to stay as he had a long-term girlfriend. The 22-year-old’s lawyer argued he had ‘established a private and family life’.

RAPIST: Nigerian Akindoyin Akinshipe, 24, escaped deportation in 2011 when judges ruled he had a right to a private life here even though he has no wife or children. He had been jailed for raping a girl of 13 when he was 15.

BURGLAR: Wayne Bishop, 33, from Clifton, Nottinghamshire, was let out of prison in May 2011 after just one month of an eight month sentence so he could look after his five children on the grounds their rights were more important than those of his victims.

SEX OFFENDER: Mohammed Kendeh escaped removal to Sierra Leone despite convictions for robbery, burglary, arson and assaults on 11 women. An immigration judge ruled in 2007 that as Kendeh, 24, came to Britain aged six, and had almost no family in West Africa, he had effectively become ‘one of us’.

If these crimes were committed by UK citizens would you deport them in addition to their other punishments?

Why not?

yrs,
rubato

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17265
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: 'uman rights

Post by Scooter »

They did do so, once upon a time.

That's how we ended up with the United States and Australia.

(ducks)
"Hang on while I log in to the James Webb telescope to search the known universe for who the fuck asked you." -- James Fell

Big RR
Posts: 14907
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: 'uman rights

Post by Big RR »

Of course when you realized the "deportations" lowered the average IQs in both England and the destination country, you sought to retain your best and brightest; pity it took so long.

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 21464
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: 'uman rights

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Transportation to the USA was mostly used as the punishment for captured Scots and Irish (so Big RR has a point) "rebels" prior to US independence. Acts of rebellion included the wearing of kilts and playing bagpipes (a sensible proscription). During 1776-1783 and especially in the later years, thousands of these "criminals" fled the USA for Canada. Transportation to Australia began in 1787.

Transportation 1787-1840 was largely a substitution for the death penalty, it being increasingly realized that some capital crimes should not in fact deserve the more drastic punishment. However, since those shipped out were going from one part of the British empire to another, it was not regarded as deportation but as "transportation" and many such sentences were of limited duration. Of course, it was not anticipated that many so transported would desire to (or be able to) return to the mother country.

The issue here is not to compare citizens with a natural right to remain in the UK with foreigners who should be executed if they would like to stay or sent back to their own country if not.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

Big RR
Posts: 14907
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: 'uman rights

Post by Big RR »

playing bagpipes (a sensible proscription)

Can't argue with that. :ok
foreigners who should be executed if they would like to stay or sent back to their own country if not.
The UK has no law permitting execution (citizens or foreigners), does it?

oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: 'uman rights

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

Seems like they need better judges handing out the senences to these criminals.

Big RR
Posts: 14907
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: 'uman rights

Post by Big RR »

oldr--maybe, or maybe we don't have the entire story. 4 months for killing someone while driving when suspended seems pretty short--I'll bet something different occurred. The second story does not say whether the deportation determination is proceeding or not whille he is incarcerated, but I'll be it is. The third seems to be based on a lack of evidence and nothing makes him seem like a threat in the UK. The fourth appears to be a bit strange, but do criminals in the UK routinely get this right--I don't know. The fifth is strange also, but it might be that those family ties require his presence as a caretaker or something else, we don't know. The sixth looks pretty horrible, but then reestablishing the relationship might be important to the child's mental health and she may no longer be a threat if they discovered what caused the outburst. the sixth is not all that surprising since he is just listed as a "robber" (pickpocket? who knows?) and since many societies recognize family ties may be established without marriage. The seventh talks about a rape that happened 9 years ago (and might even be a statutory rape for all we know, no details are provided) and he has been in the UK since at least 15 (if not earlier). the eighth is a burglary (not a violent crime) with an 8 month sentence, so whatever occurred is violent; he was allowed out to care for his 5 children, who might have been wards of the state if not--it's probably pretty common for a minor crime (not sure what rights of the victims are affected by his release today that would not be affected by his release 7 moths later, but I'd bet they were given consideration if they were raised). As for the last one, someone in England since the age of 6 is probably more English than anything else--certainly more English than Sierra Leonian; to deport him would seem cruel IMHO (and again we don't know what the "assaults" were, nor the details of his "robbery, burglary, and arson").

Not to say they all "deserved" to remain, but it is not necessarily outrageous in any of the cases given what information we have. The courts may well have blown it, but then they may not have. I am more inclined to accept the decision of a properly informed jurist than the writings designed to inflame public opinion.

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 9101
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: 'uman rights

Post by Sue U »

Big RR wrote:maybe we don't have the entire story.
Well, Daily Mail, so that's a foregone conclusion.
Big RR wrote:I am more inclined to accept the decision of a properly informed jurist than the writings designed to inflame public opinion.
Wot, Daily Mail inflammatory?
GAH!

Big RR
Posts: 14907
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: 'uman rights

Post by Big RR »

I didn't realize it was the Daily Mail; you're right, that says it all.

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33646
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: 'uman rights

Post by Gob »

Big RR wrote:oldr--maybe, or maybe we don't have the entire story. 4 months for killing someone while driving when suspended seems pretty short--I'll bet something different occurred. .
Here from the lefty Guardian;
Amy Houston was knocked down in 2003 and died six weeks later. The callous cruelty of Ibrahim, whose car mounted the pavement and who abandoned her lying under its wheels, is no less shocking after seven years.

Yet he was prosecuted only for the minor offences of fleeing the scene and driving without a licence – not for murder, manslaughter or dangerous driving, as one might have expected. The court took a remarkably lenient view by sentencing him to only four months imprisonment, in spite of his having a string of previous convictions.

BBC
An asylum-seeker who left a girl dying under the wheels of his car when he fled the scene can stay in the UK, two immigration judges have ruled.

Iraqi Kurd Aso Mohammed Ibrahim was jailed for four months after knocking down Amy Houston in Blackburn in 2003.

Her father Paul Houston, from Darwen, told judges last month they had the power to bring his "seven years of hell to an end" by sending Ibrahim to Iraq.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

Big RR
Posts: 14907
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: 'uman rights

Post by Big RR »

Well, one thing re Ibrahim:
he was prosecuted only for the minor offences of fleeing the scene and driving without a licence – not for murder, manslaughter or dangerous driving
why this is the case is beyond me; but it has little to do with granting/denying asylum to him. I can understand that her father would like to see him punished further, but I still thing something was very wrong with the case if the court let him off that easily. Given what he was convicted of, the fact that it didn't affect his asylum bid is not surprising.

Post Reply