Who is the Human Rights Act supposed to protect? Citizens of a law abiding democratic country? If so, it isn't working! The only people who benefit from this unnecessary legislation are criminals, prison inmates, terrorists, hate preachers, bogus asylum seekers and the Lawyers & Barristers who represent them (at tax payers expense!)

As one of the recognised leaders of the western world, is it really necessary to retain the so called 'Human Rights Act'? Our laws and judicial system coped perfectly adaquately before the introduction of this Act.

This Act needs to be abolished and replaced with a British Bill of Rights ASAP!!

Why is this idea important?

If this Coalition Government is genuinely interested in the general populations views on the 'State of the Nation', as we see it, then you need to take heed of the overwhelming majority of people who believe the Human Rights Act is being abused by people who least deserve to be afforded this privilege. People who commit crimes – burglars, terrorists etc, as far as I see it, forfeit thier right to claim 'Human Rights' anyway! This system is hugely expensive, totally unnecessary and needs reviewing on an urgent basis.

Maybe I'm just too cynical but wasn't the Human Rights Act introduced by a Prime Minister who's wife was a Human Rights Lawyer? – – just coincidence?

One Reply to “Abolish unnecessary Human Rights Act”

  1. Removing a person’s rights for committing a crime? So because a woman killed her abusive husband out of self defense, and was sent to prison on a reduced charge of manslaughter, she automatically gives up her Article 3 rights of not having to be subject to inhumane or degrading treatment? It becomes all right to torture them for the lolz?

    If we were to repeal the Human rights act the judiciary would lose the right to comment on legislation which is incompatible; yes this angle is pushed by would-be asylum seekers and people who have opted homelessness, but the laws protect us. It provides the judges one single weapon to protect us from laws which could be considered tyrannical and have slipped through the net.

    As for a bill of rights, it would completely undermine our already established system. It would establish the rights we have, forming an exhaustive list which is not how our system functions, rather we have a right to do whatever we wish, unless there is a law that states otherwise.
    “The right to swing my fist stops where the other man’s face starts”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.