L’ECHR deve essere riformato per ripristinare la fiducia del pubblico “sfilacciato” – Lord Cancelliere
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/government-echr-strasbourg-lord-chancellor-justice-secretary-b2772407.html
di corbynista2029
L’ECHR deve essere riformato per ripristinare la fiducia del pubblico “sfilacciato” – Lord Cancelliere
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/government-echr-strasbourg-lord-chancellor-justice-secretary-b2772407.html
di corbynista2029
14 commenti
Systems work fine until someone finds an exploit. You then need to patch out that exploit to fix the problem.
Its common logic for the whole world so it should be the same for law.
I really hate this Labour argument of “we need to move right to prevent collapse of a good thing”. [Liz Kendall](https://www.itv.com/news/2025-05-20/5-billion-welfare-cuts-needed-to-save-system-kendall-to-say) did it with welfare cuts too, saying “reform is needed to make sure the system survives.”
Won’t be surprised if Streeting says we _need_ to privatise the NHS to save the NHS.
The EHRC works fine it’s just some judges interpretation of it in some cases.
If the government is not happy about any individual judges ruling they should ask to appeal it.
The fact those representing the government often turn up unprepared or not at all is a bigger issue.
Also the ones complaining about it are the Tories, their media baron friends and the likes of Farage. While the likes of Farage are populists so will say anything, it’s worth having a good think why the Tories and their friends don’t like it. After all it’s better for them if we don’t have the right to protest, they can invade our privacy and can’t join unions/campaigning groups.
The ECHR cannot be a document set in stone otherwise we are in a theocracy
It’s absolutely fine if people take the time to actually read about what it does, and as importantly, what it doesn’t do.
Looks like we’re officially positioning to withdraw so we can finally do something about all those damn immigrants and trans people without worrying about their human rights.
Yes we need more laws against worker exploitation and laws that enforce tax payment by the wealthy!
Oh look, more calls to “reform” the ECHR, without specifying what they actually want to change about it, other than vague assertions of “we want to be able to break it when convenient.”
Almost as if this is a political problem, rather than a legal one.
Reformed how, this never seems to be satisfactorily laid out. There are people who find cases or complain about (often poorly reported) people who apparently have been allowed to stay because of some “barmy” decision, but if you read the judgement there tends not to be a way around it. We aren’t going to deport a criminal to their death, no. As otherwise *you* could be deported to your death too, and we can’t complain if you were on death row anywhere else. As a loose example.
An ECHR which ‘reforms’ to no longer protect basic human rights, as Shabana Mahmood seems to want, would no longer be fit for purpose. It feels like self-proclaimed ‘liberals’ are increasingly finding their penchant for social conservatism (whether it’s stripping rights from migrants or trans people or disabled people) is increasingly butting up against their proclaimed support for human rights, and their ‘solution’ is apparently just to reduce what ‘human rights’ actually means. Pathetic.
> The Lord Chancellor added: “The European Convention on Human Rights is one of the great achievements of post-war politics. It has endured because it has evolved. Now, it must do so again.”
The ECHR was one of the greatest achievements of the post-war era precisely because it universally protected the rights of all human beings. Shabana Mahmood no longer wants it to do so. I’m so tired of liberals pretending to be the defenders of the post-war consensus while eagerly tearing it down.
My fraying of confidence in the rule of law has nothing to do with the ECHR.
It’s all to do with politicians and the establishment, it’s all to do with how the law apparently doesn’t apply equally.
Yes, the ECHR was created with great intentions but has turned into a method to effectively abuse the charitable approach it supports and subvert the rule of law (by “cancelling out” other laws on the books or simply being used to unreasonably hamstring public bodies).
Too sad that people only hear about criminals or asylum seekers using the ECHR to get out of being deported because they look after their neighbour’s third cousin’s cat or something. Rarely do they hear of the actual good cases relating to gender equality and climate action that the ECHR also rules on, which are unequivocally good.
Labour stealing Reform’s soiled clothes. Which is worse, a party of open fascists or a party of closet fascists?