As we have seen, Raab claims that the Bill of Rights “helped mould a separation of powers between government, Parliament and the courts – a system of checks and balances to prevent any one branch of the state from dominating the others or abusing its power”. But as far back as 1976 the Conservative sometime Lord Chancellor, Lord Hailsham, was warning that the parliamentary system could be exploited in such a manner that it could act as an ‘elective dictatorship’. Continue reading
The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog
Category: Human Rights (Page 1 of 43)
Raab’s view of the Bill of Rights 1689 is, if anything, even more rose-tinted than his misty-eyed evocation of Magna Carta. According to him, the Bill “built on earlier rights. Fair trial safeguards were added, strengthening the independence of the jury selection from bias, and requiring the prior conviction of a criminal offence before the imposition of fines or the forfeiture of property”. He also points out that it added to Article 20 of Magna Carta “a ban on the infliction of ‘cruel and unusual punishments’”, which he sees as “an early precursor to the modern ban on torture”. Continue reading
Raab expanded considerably on the sentiments expressed above in the first chapter of his book The Assault on Liberty: What Went Wrong with Rights (2009). When this was published, Raab took the opportunity openly to state that “I don’t support the Human Rights Act and I don’t believe in economic and social rights”, and many of the Act’s defenders regard the Bill of Rights Bill that he has recently introduced as the culmination of a twelve-year campaign to rip up our current human rights protections. Continue reading
According to Peter Hitchens in the Mail, 22 June 2022: “There’s no such thing as human rights … They are an invention, made out of pure wind. If you are seriously interested in staying free, you should not rely on these flatulent, vague phrases to help you. They are in fact a weapon in the hands of those who wish to remove your liberty and transform society”. Continue reading
In the case of Mesić v. Croatia ((2022) ECHR 348) the Court of Human Rights found that there had been no breach of Article 10 when a fine had been imposed upon Stjepan Mesić, the President of Croatia from 2000-2010, for insulting Ivan Jurašinović, a lawyer of Croatian origin practising in France. Continue reading
While the recently introduced Bill of Rights Bill [pdf] appears to weaken the judicial protection of fundamental rights in some respects, the government claims the Bill will strengthen the right to freedom of speech. Continue reading
On 28 April 2022, with little advance notice, an announcement was released by various governments informing the world that they had just signed a “Declaration for the Future of the Internet”. In all, sixty-one countries signed this grandiose-sounding document, ranging from Albania to Uruguay. Signatories notably included the US, which was the sponsor of the Declaration, the 27 countries of the EU, the UK, Japan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and four of the five Nordic countries. Continue reading
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has recently delivered a judgment in which, for the first time, it refers to the notion of SLAPP (Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation). Continue reading
In the case of IVT v Romania ([2022] ECHR 189) the Fourth Section of the European Court of Human Rights found that the domestic courts had breached an 11 year old ‘s Article 8 rights in dismissing her claim based on the broadcast of an television interview which had been conducted without obtaining parental consent. Although the child’s face was blurred she was still identifiable on the broadcast. The Court emphasised that parental consent was not a mere formality but was an important safeguard for the rights of children. Continue reading
The Ministry of Justice (“MoJ”) Consultation, “Human Rights Act Reform: A modern Bill of Rights” (the “Consultation”), contains proposals that tips the balance between “respect for private and family life.” (A.8) and freedom of expression and to impart information (A.10) in favour of the latter (A.10). Continue reading
Recent Judgments
© 2022 Inforrm's Blog
Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑