[Bradford] U.K. Court, in David Miranda Case, Rules Terrorism Act Violates Fundamental Rights of Free Press

[Robert Burrell Donkin]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 3:16 PM, John Robert Hudson <
j.r.hudson at virginmedia.com> wrote:

> Hi Brian
>

Hi John


> Not strictly true; David Cameron wants to replace our Human Rights Act
> with a
> UK Bill of Rights. However, (1) he can only leave the Human Rights
> Convention
> if he leaves the European Union (2) if he does, he will find that many
> countries will stop extraditions as they will be unwilling to send people
> for
> trial to a country that does not respect human rights.
>

Even this is not quite precisely true.

Turns out that the Tories discovered that almost all of the problems with
the Human Right had very little to do with the Convention itself, and
everything to do with the ongoing conflict with Europe institutions.


> So, if it ever happens, the Bill of Rights will have to include some
> continuation of the ECHR. (Note: this manifesto commitment has already been
> watered down and looks like being further watered down; many suspect it
> went
> in manifesto because he never expected to win and to have to act on it.)
>

The Human Rights Convention is written in English more-or-less by English
lawyers who intended that the language was to be read in accord with
established English legal practice and language. The Human Rights Act is
very different, being what the commission think needs to be passed to
implement what they think human rights need to be.

The Human Rights Act passed in washup failed to repeal the large bodies of
existing equality legislation nor did it address the Act of Settlement or
the Equity reforms of the courts. So though the langauge used in drafting
seems to sets blacks above whites, female above males and so on, there
seems no way to obtain legal traction in UK courts to enforce (say)
limiting access to the NHS for white males.

Turns out that when the Court of Justice sits on behalf the Union (as
opposed to the same judges sitting as custodians of the Convention), the
language used is interpreted in EU terms and based on Napoleanic and Roman
legal traditions. In particular, as Roman is Living Law, this is influenced
by prevailing politics in the commission. In particular, the judgement is
made only in principle and the commission then annoucements what it thinks
needs to be done.

So, passing the words of the Convention into statue rather than the
drafting dictated by the Commission would make very little difference in
practice. The Court of Justice - when sitting on behalf of the Union -
would continue to build emerging Living Law in the Roman tradition rather
than use the English words of the Convention. On the other hand, UK courts
steadfastly refuse to move from a thousand years of legal continuous
tradition, and continue to interpret the English words in the English legal
tradition.

Of course, had the idiots done the decent thing and just used Scottish Law
as the basis of the emergent European legal system, they would have had not
only one of the finest legal in the world but also one that is compatible
with Atlantic common law.

Robert


>
> John
> --
> On Wednesday 20 Jan 2016 10:40:18 Brian A wrote:
> > U.K. Court, in David Miranda Case, Rules Terrorism Act Violates
> Fundamental
> > Rights of Free Press As a background, for those who have forgotten/not
> > followed this: David Miranda is the partner of Guardian journalist Glenn
> > Greenwald who interview Ed Snowden in Hong Kong. It is interesting to
> note
> > that this case was won because of the protection of the European
> Convention
> > of Human Rights. As I understand it Cameron wants us out of European
> Human
> > Rights - so where would that leave us! UK Court Rules Terrorism Act
> > Violates Fundamental Rights of Free Press
> > |   |
> > |   |  |   |   |   |   |   |
> > | UK Court Rules Terrorism Act Violates Fundamental Rights...The court
> ruled
> > | that the UK's laws breach rights in case involving seizure of documents
> > | from the partner of Intercept co-founder Glenn Greenwald. |
> > |
> > | View on theintercept.com | Preview by Yahoo |
> > |
> > |   |
> >
> > Brian
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bradford mailing list
> Bradford at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/bradford
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/bradford/attachments/20160121/ee3a07a5/attachment.html>