This paper looks at whether the United Kingdom should withdraw from the convention by investigating the following issues; Constitutional issues and parliamentary sovereignty, the impact and effect of HRA 1998, and it's problems, the legal status of ECTHR judgments and the article of the ECHR in the UK…
Sovereignty of the parliament dictates that the parliament has the sole discretion to make and amend laws in the UK. No person or body is recognized by the UK legislation to overrule the law made by the parliament. In this spirit the parliament is seen to be competent to make any laws. Laws that deprive the citizens of their right to property, liberty, voting, and life among others should be seen as valid so long as they have been passed by the parliament. This is done in faith that the parliament can exercise self restraint and only pass laws that are at par with the moral standards. However, this has not been the case always because some politicians have normally put their own selfish interests at the cost of national interests.
The ECHR being an international body helps to regulate such offensive or repugnant laws. The citizens of Britain should advocate against their government withdrawal from the convention. This is for the benefit of regulation of the laws that the parliament may pass.
The Human Rights Act of 1998 and its Problems
The human rights act of 1998 was drafted on the principle of protection of human rights but reconciled with the sovereignty of the state (UK Government, 2012). Under this act, the parliament may make legislations and the courts may not necessarily quash them on the grounds of inconsistency with the European Convention on human rights. In fact, it is only the higher courts that should interpret the legislations and determine their inconsistency. The higher courts may only declare incompatibility where it is very clear. This act was put forward in order to ensure parliamentary sovereignty. ...
an Rights Act of 1998 and its Problems The human rights act of 1998 was drafted on the principle of protection of human rights but reconciled with the sovereignty of the state (UK Government, 2012). Under this act, the parliament may make legislations and the courts may not necessarily quash them on the grounds of inconsistency with the European Convention on human rights. In fact, it is only the higher courts that should interpret the legislations and determine their inconsistency. The higher courts may only declare incompatibility where it is very clear. This act was put forward in order to ensure parliamentary sovereignty. However, the enactment of the act has transformed the constitutional environment in which the parliament’s legislative power exists; the legislative powers have been altered. Three features of the act pose problems to its enactment and goes against the ECHR. The first problem is that the act places the power to interpret whether the acts are consistent with convention rights in the hands of the judiciary. This greatly alters the process of interpretation of the legislation. This has two implications; it is rare for legislation properly interpreted to go against the human rights norms. The parliament will always use a clearer and precise language if it wishes to abrogate human rights. The use of clear language draws the attention of public and the parliament. The government may put a strong justification of the legislation to win the public support. This legislation may be infringing on the rights of the people but it may escape the eyes of the judiciary which has been given the ultimate power to determine its compatibility with the rights convention (Elliot, 2002). The second problem is that the minister in-charge of the bill should make a ...
Cite this document
(“Should the UK withdraw from the European Convention on human rights Essay”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/law/87562-should-the-uk-withdraw-from-the-european
(Should the UK Withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights Essay)
“Should the UK Withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights Essay”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/law/87562-should-the-uk-withdraw-from-the-european.
The basis on which Wicket World would defend the claim would be founded on a number of provisions of the law as enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act, 1998. The claim according to Article 8 on right to privacy is however limited by Article 18 that limits on use of restriction of rights.
This division is largely jurisdictional, based on the differences between immigration law and criminal law, as well as being technical in founding the division on the notion of difference between the rights of a citizen and non-citizen. The nature of human rights is for them to apply to all people regardless of race, nationality, sex, or ideology.
The focus has been put on the issue of the rights of detainees. Owing to the allegations of human rights violation by the UK government in the course of the War on Terror, the question of detainees’ rights has emerged as a complicated issue. The issue of the rights of the detainees is a very complex and dynamic legal debate and sometimes it may amount to ethical and technical dilemmas.
The act makes it illegal for all public bodies to take any actions or decisions which are in contravention to the European Convention on Human Rights.The only exception to this is Parliament, because it has the legislative capacity in the United Kingdom, and should, therefore, remain sovereign
A thriving and robust democracy, it is often said, can only be achieved when basic human rights are preserved. Cherished principles like press freedom, religious freedom, diversity and pluralism are indispensable requirements of a democratic society. It is difficult, if not altogether impossible, to argue against the validity of these principles.
They also signed 5 other protocols. The main objectives of the Convention are to maintain and protect the Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom, to achieve the unity between the members of the European Countries, to implement collectively the Human Rights proclaimed by General Assembly of United Nations as Universal Declaration of Human Rights on 10.12.1948.
Mill, being a feminist critique while arguing on the problem of inequality states that women's wages must be regulated under any circumstances. Ball (2001) while highlighting Mill's argument states the main reason for such inequality is the choice of limited occupations chosen for women and women have only grant access to them.
That is the true measure of what terrorism may achieve. It is for Parliament to decide whether to give the terrorists such a victory"
In December 2004, the House of Lords, UK, opposed Britain's detention of foreign nationals suspected of terrorism indefinitely and held without trial.