DZ feels that those who criticise or oppose the act can not possibly be familiar with it's articles. To summarise;
Article 2. (there is no article 1!). The right to life.
Article 3 The right not to be subjected to torture, or inhumane or degrading treatment.
Article 4 The right not to be held in slavery or servitude. (Jeremy Hunt take note)
Article 5 The right to liberty and security.
Article 6 The right to a fair trial. (GMC take note)
Article 7 The right not to be punished without law. (This is particularly relevant to the GMC, who insist on knowing if a doctor has committed an offense overseas, even if it is for something that is not illegal in this country, such as being gay for example)
Article 8 The right to respect for private life, which includes the right to privacy of correspondence.
Article 9 The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
Article 10. The right to freedom of expression, freedom of speech.
Article 11 The right to freedom of assembly and association.
Article 12 The right to marry
So, what's not to like?
The Human roights act was dreamed up by the Foreign Office for those benighted countries on the continent who had a legal system which only allowed its citizens to do something if it was expressly allowed. Unlike the UK system which allows us to do anything unless it is exressly forbidden. Moreover those same poor benighted souls did not have the advantage of magna Carta and the 1689 Bill of Rights - and habeas corpus. The UK not meant to be included in thsi continental reform but by the time the Home Office found out what the Foreign Office doing it was too late! The Americans who have a common law type of system like us felt no need to adopt the Human Rights Law.
ReplyDeleteAnd frankly I am fed up with people demanding their rights without acknowledging their responsibilities!
So there!!
Utter Bollocks, start to finish. The act is nothing to do with the foreign office but originated with the UN. Which article(s) of the act do you actually have a problem with Dizzy?
Delete