European Human Rights Act

We must scrap the current European Act and replace it with a well thought out British Bill of Rights which will protect the law abiding citizen but allow criminals, terrorists etc to be punished, by deportation , if necessary, to countries which have the death penalty. If thet break the law in those countries then they must pay the penalties imposed by the country they break the law in.

Prisoners in this country will forfeit most of their rights but should retain the right to life.

Why is this idea important?

We must scrap the current European Act and replace it with a well thought out British Bill of Rights which will protect the law abiding citizen but allow criminals, terrorists etc to be punished, by deportation , if necessary, to countries which have the death penalty. If thet break the law in those countries then they must pay the penalties imposed by the country they break the law in.

Prisoners in this country will forfeit most of their rights but should retain the right to life.

Repeal the Human Rights Act

I think that we should repeal, or stop becoming signatories to the Human Rights act.  Why should illegal immigrants be granted the right to remain in the UK simply because they are homosexual and that homosexuality is illegal in their own country?  I am also fed up with the European Human Rights court preventing us from sending ABU Hamza to the USA because he might get a sentance that is too long – the guy promotes Islamic terrorism.  Why are we fighting terrorists with one hand tied behind our back?

Why is this idea important?

I think that we should repeal, or stop becoming signatories to the Human Rights act.  Why should illegal immigrants be granted the right to remain in the UK simply because they are homosexual and that homosexuality is illegal in their own country?  I am also fed up with the European Human Rights court preventing us from sending ABU Hamza to the USA because he might get a sentance that is too long – the guy promotes Islamic terrorism.  Why are we fighting terrorists with one hand tied behind our back?

Repeal the Human Rights Act

This act has created so many problems and costs and virtualy prevents the country running properly in the interests of its citizens.

 

Well publicised difficulties are those preventing us from dealing firmly with terrorists and criminal (especially from abroad). But in every aspect of life common sense seems to be turned on its head by this regulation

 

Why is this idea important?

This act has created so many problems and costs and virtualy prevents the country running properly in the interests of its citizens.

 

Well publicised difficulties are those preventing us from dealing firmly with terrorists and criminal (especially from abroad). But in every aspect of life common sense seems to be turned on its head by this regulation

 

Repeal The Sections Of The Human Rights Act That Are Farcical.

Repeal the parts of The Human Rights Act that make fools of every law abiding citizen in this country. A recent example, a prisoner suing the government because he had to wait a few days to be treated for toothache. He was awarded £66,000 in compensation which was reduced on appeal to £44,000. All paid for from the tax payers pocket, legal aid, compensation etc. With rights come responsibilities. I'm all for people having protection from discrimination & intimidation in all aspects of their lives. But this legislation should not be abused by those who seek to use it time & time again to further their own ends.

Why is this idea important?

Repeal the parts of The Human Rights Act that make fools of every law abiding citizen in this country. A recent example, a prisoner suing the government because he had to wait a few days to be treated for toothache. He was awarded £66,000 in compensation which was reduced on appeal to £44,000. All paid for from the tax payers pocket, legal aid, compensation etc. With rights come responsibilities. I'm all for people having protection from discrimination & intimidation in all aspects of their lives. But this legislation should not be abused by those who seek to use it time & time again to further their own ends.

Disgrace

The HRA is fundamentally insulting to British people.  Those British people who promote it bring disgrace upon themselves and our nation.  The very fact that I can make this comment has always been the case here, however, the HRA attempts to removing that right.  The phrase "you can't say that today" has entered our common vocabulary.  The HRA has not provided us with any protection that we did not have before, but imposes an Orwellin nightmare of newspeak that prevents us from speaking out for fear of the thought police.  Get rid of it!

Why is this idea important?

The HRA is fundamentally insulting to British people.  Those British people who promote it bring disgrace upon themselves and our nation.  The very fact that I can make this comment has always been the case here, however, the HRA attempts to removing that right.  The phrase "you can't say that today" has entered our common vocabulary.  The HRA has not provided us with any protection that we did not have before, but imposes an Orwellin nightmare of newspeak that prevents us from speaking out for fear of the thought police.  Get rid of it!

Leave the EU – that should stop most of the daft, expensive legislation

Leaving the EU should stop most of the daft, expensive legislation which this site was set up to do. Most of the ideas proposed on this site would be impossible to repeal because the are binding on our government. Euro diktat has precedence over UK law in many cases.

Most of our legislation is now directed from Brussels. The government you elect here in the UK can rarely do anything about laws, regulations and bureacracy from the EU. Most of these things have been created after lobbying by special interest groups or big business. They have the deep pockets to employ specialist PR agents who – at best – wine and dine the EU bureacrats.

Even where the legislations sounds to be positive, it is usually at enormous cost.

Every year, thousands of new rules and regulations are published producing a monumental nuisance for almost every organisation in the country.

Some we know are EU-inspired, but other laws are less well known as EU in origin. In fact most of our legislation comes from over the water.  But the majority of EU laws and regulations are expensive to implement and monitor, and ineffective in not producing the intended effect; some are harmful, and of course some actually useful.

Why is this idea important?

Leaving the EU should stop most of the daft, expensive legislation which this site was set up to do. Most of the ideas proposed on this site would be impossible to repeal because the are binding on our government. Euro diktat has precedence over UK law in many cases.

Most of our legislation is now directed from Brussels. The government you elect here in the UK can rarely do anything about laws, regulations and bureacracy from the EU. Most of these things have been created after lobbying by special interest groups or big business. They have the deep pockets to employ specialist PR agents who – at best – wine and dine the EU bureacrats.

Even where the legislations sounds to be positive, it is usually at enormous cost.

Every year, thousands of new rules and regulations are published producing a monumental nuisance for almost every organisation in the country.

Some we know are EU-inspired, but other laws are less well known as EU in origin. In fact most of our legislation comes from over the water.  But the majority of EU laws and regulations are expensive to implement and monitor, and ineffective in not producing the intended effect; some are harmful, and of course some actually useful.

radical review of Human Rights Act

the HRA needs a radical review, properly defining its overall role and its relation to other legislation. Its present form is so all-embracing and ambiguous as to effectively render virtually anything legal or illegal and prsent unlimited scope for politically-motivated harassment and criminalisation

Why is this idea important?

the HRA needs a radical review, properly defining its overall role and its relation to other legislation. Its present form is so all-embracing and ambiguous as to effectively render virtually anything legal or illegal and prsent unlimited scope for politically-motivated harassment and criminalisation

Article 6

Article 6 of the HRA 1998 should be criminalised to perversion of the course of justice as there needs to be procedural nonsense and reality is the judge is implicitly involved in an art 6 issue

It is very very difficult to do a miscarriage of justice as this requires "inadvertence" and or likely a lack of evidence in a case different from an ommittance of evidence in a case.  Therefore a miscarriage of justice should be seen as different from a "deliberate" act by a judge such that there is an article 6 hearing on appeal.

A good indicator of a judge not in control of his courtroom is a request or repeated requests for contempt of court orders in by a party to a case, or a continual or overly long delay in proceedings – the courts have electronic scheduling and the case should be moving in fortnightly or monthly time frame cycles – where it is not, then an appeal is likely and is a good indicator that a "deliberate" injustice is occurring on the case where people are currently signposted to article 6 when the issue is really a perversion of the course of justice.

Why is this idea important?

Article 6 of the HRA 1998 should be criminalised to perversion of the course of justice as there needs to be procedural nonsense and reality is the judge is implicitly involved in an art 6 issue

It is very very difficult to do a miscarriage of justice as this requires "inadvertence" and or likely a lack of evidence in a case different from an ommittance of evidence in a case.  Therefore a miscarriage of justice should be seen as different from a "deliberate" act by a judge such that there is an article 6 hearing on appeal.

A good indicator of a judge not in control of his courtroom is a request or repeated requests for contempt of court orders in by a party to a case, or a continual or overly long delay in proceedings – the courts have electronic scheduling and the case should be moving in fortnightly or monthly time frame cycles – where it is not, then an appeal is likely and is a good indicator that a "deliberate" injustice is occurring on the case where people are currently signposted to article 6 when the issue is really a perversion of the course of justice.