...repeal the "Human Rights Act"

Isn't that like turkeys voting for Christmas?

...repeal the "Human Rights Act"

Isn't that like turkeys voting for Christmas?

Oh it'll happen & a lot sooner than many will expect. The EU has been given 6 weeks to save the Euro & due to the cumbersome quangos/committees involved, it won't be saved. Then europe will be saved.

THEN britain can repeal all those useless EU laws that have helped to cripple this country....

AH Bisto..Xmas come early......

---

Good points Chris, however, the Human Rights Act has a huge bearing on this case whether we like it or not, so a seperate thread is not needed as its part & parcel of the whole debate.

---

Yep, lawyers...another continuing waste of taxpayers money & they're not bothered as they get paid regardless.

---

Good points Chris, however, the Human Rights Act has a huge bearing on this case whether we like it or not, so a seperate thread is not needed as its part & parcel of the whole debate.

I'm not sure that the residents of Dale Farm have raised the matter as a breach of their Human Rights under any of the relevant legislation. I've attempted to review all the articles that have been posted to this thread, and cannot confirm that it is noted in any of them that this has happened (though, of course, I may have missed something). The wikipedia article on Dale Farm does note that the UN has had some interest in whether the Human Rights of the Dale Farm residents have been protected under the various UN treaties that the UK is a signatory to, though it may not be a complete record on the subject.

The UN has stated:

The UK has been the object of an enquiry from CERD under the
early warning and urgent action procedure. During its 76th session
in February 2010, CERD considered the impending eviction of an Irish and Romani Traveller community from Dale Farm in Essex.
The committee expressed concern that the planned eviction of the Traveller community from Dale Farm might imply a breach of Article 5 e (iii), guaranteeing the right to housing.

It is not clear from what I've seen thus far that the UN's view on this matter is part of the criteria being used to assess the planning dispute.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Oh you mean the "B-Liar Witch Project"....never seen it, probably just as bad as the real McCoy.....

Sirius, I could not possibly say..."nudge-nudge wink-wink."

Fair comments BUT as mentioned on the news this morning, what about the Human Rights of the residents in that community...don't theirs count for anything?

DO YOU SEE ANY LAWYER jumping onto their Bandwagon?

---

Fair comments BUT as mentioned on the news this morning, what about the Human Rights of the residents in that community...don't theirs count for anything?

DO YOU SEE ANY LAWYER jumping onto their Bandwagon?

Sirius, fundamental mistake No.1...Human Rights Act was bought about to
protect only those who have broken the law and not for those who abide by it.

Fair comments BUT as mentioned on the news this morning, what about the Human Rights of the residents in that community...don't theirs count for anything?

DO YOU SEE ANY LAWYER jumping onto their Bandwagon?

What Human Rights of the other residents of the community are in jeopardy of being breached? Note I did not say, and nor did the UN state, that the Dale Farm's residents Human Rights had or were about to be breached. At this point I think Chris's comments are valid, Human Rights legislation has not been shown to be part of the Dale Farm topic until such time as there is evidence to show otherwise I think it wise to adhere to his request.

It is estimated that there are a large number of illegal Traveller sites in the country mainly in Essex and the South, but I don't have exact numbers. See this report from 2009 Numbers. Many other Councils are therefore in the same position as Basildon are. If the eviction ruling is upheld and carried out, then it will give the impetus for other Councils to tackle their own problems in the same way, citing the Dale Farm decision. That is what I meant by far reaching effects.

I had thought that planning decisions were generally a matter of municipal byelaws. If that is the case, then the effects may not be all that far reaching.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Fair comments BUT as mentioned on the news this morning, what about the Human Rights of the residents in that community...don't theirs count for anything?

DO YOU SEE ANY LAWYER jumping onto their Bandwagon?

Sirius, fundamental mistake No.1...Human Rights Act was bought about to
protect only those who have broken the law and not for those who abide by it.

Thanks MJ...I forgot....we "poor" civilised decent residents have no lwayers or BHL's to jump to our rescue...

Must remember that in future.

---

[quote]The UK has been the object of an enquiry from CERD under the
early warning and urgent action procedure. During its 76th session
in February 2010, CERD considered the impending eviction of an Irish and Romani Traveller community from Dale Farm in Essex.
The committee expressed concern that the planned eviction of the Traveller community from Dale Farm might imply a breach of Article 5 e (iii), guaranteeing the right to housing.

BUT isn't this a breach of human rights or we going to get pedantic?

---

The UK has been the object of an enquiry from CERD under the
early warning and urgent action procedure. During its 76th session
in February 2010, CERD considered the impending eviction of an Irish and Romani Traveller community from Dale Farm in Essex.
The committee expressed concern that the planned eviction of the Traveller community from Dale Farm might imply a breach of Article 5 e (iii), guaranteeing the right to housing.

BUT isn't this a breach of human rights or we going to get pedantic?

What the UN said "may imply a breach" is not the same thing as saying "there is (or is not) a breach". I don't think that's an exercise of pedantry. The UN has not said that the activities at Dale Farm are a breach of Human Rights under the UN treaties, nor do I have evidence to believe any UK or European Court has been given a chance to rule on the Dale Farm matter on a Human Rights basis. That others may choose to conflate Dale Farm with Human Rights legislation does not mean that we have to. Can we move on?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

So why did the UN get involved? It's certainly a national & not an international issue UNTIL Article 5 is breached!

Showing concerns? Shouldn't they be looking elsewhere on more obivious concerns? Or is this an easy target to deflect criticism of the UN?

---

So why did the UN get involved? It's certainly a national & not an international issue UNTIL Article 5 is breached!

Showing concerns? Shouldn't they be looking elsewhere on more obivious concerns? Or is this an easy target to deflect criticism of the UN?

While I can't speak for the UN, the document in question is specifically about Britain, I would imagine that there are similar documents about other UN member nations. The same document also notes:

Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) is the UN ‘treaty body’ that monitors the implementation of ICERD. It is made up of 18 independent members from around the world; all are considered experts on racial discrimination. They are nominated by and elected to the committee by the states parties. They typically serve a four-year term.

CERD meets twice a year in Geneva to review periodic reports from the states parties. The Committee also makes general recommendations to further explain provisions in the Convention or explore issues of particular relevance. For example, in the past, general recommendations have addressed issues such as racial discrimination in the criminal justice system and discrimination against the Roma, or Gypsies and Travellers in the UK

There is a "monitor" function which implies that issues do need to be referred to it prior to an investigation. At the start of an investigation I would imagine that this body may not have sufficient evidence to conclude that an article had been breached. Given that the CERD found that there may be the implication of a breach, it would be reasonable to assume that they are paying close attention to events, though I have no evidence to suggest that CERD would ever directly intervene on behalf of any of the parties.

Unless and until there is something of substance to discuss in relation to Human Rights legislation with respect to Dale Farm, I hope that we can now all agree that there is no Human Rights element currently at play before the courts.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Mr Cottle said Mrs Flynn was being "dispossessed", and it was arguable there had
been an unlawful interference with her right under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights to a private and family life.

An abstract above from a report about the travelers in protest in the supplied photo. So it seems to me that in the minds of these travelers legal teams there certainly hoping to use the Human Rights act as a potential defense against eviction.

Mr Cottle said Mrs Flynn was being "dispossessed", and it was arguable there had
been an unlawful interference with her right under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights to a private and family life.

An abstract above from a report about the travelers in protest in the supplied photo. So it seems to me that in the minds of these travelers legal teams there certainly hoping to use the Human Rights act as a potential defense against eviction.

That Mr Cottle has said that it is "arguable" does not mean that Mr Cottle, or indeed anyone else, has made the argument in court. A banner does not indicate anything other than the banner maker can use tools. It may well be that the legal teams are intending to submit such arguments, though I do not believe we have any evidence for them having done so to date. I guess, with Chris's permission, we could have a hypothetical discussion about the merits of making such a case.

I fear we are very wide of Chris's target for this thread. I don't believe anybody has shown that Human Rights legislation is at play in this case, and as I said before "that others may choose to conflate Dale Farm with Human Rights legislation does not mean that we have to".

Chris earlier mentioned the Dale Farm decision having "far reaching effects", if this is indeed at its core a planning dispute, are these not the province of municipal byelaws, and as such, the effects may not be so far reaching after all?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Oh but it will have far reaching effects if the public televised statement this morning from a resident is anything to go by.

Should the travellers win their case & remain, that resident who has had 2 planning applications for building an extension to her home, turned down...travellers win, she is going to go ahead with the extension & how can Basildon Council prosecute her when the illegal buildings at Dale Farm continue to remain should they win?

Interesting thought is it not? Or will the BHL's hit the resident because she is part of a captive market similar to motorists to force into paying Council Tax to see it all wasted as it currently is......& should they do prosecute her, then it would leave the Council open to accusations that they've taken back-handers.....

One law for them & one for us? Civil War here we come...& personally I would love that to occur......

---

Oh but it will have far reaching effects if the public televised statement this morning from a resident is anything to go by.

Should the travellers win their case & remain, that resident who has had 2 planning applications for building an extension to her home, turned down...travellers win, she is going to go ahead with the extension & how can Basildon Council prosecute her when the illegal buildings at Dale Farm continue to remain should they win?

Interesting thought is it not? Or will the BHL's hit the resident because she is part of a captive market similar to motorists to force into paying Council Tax to see it all wasted as it currently is......& should they do prosecute her, then it would leave the Council open to accusations that they've taken back-handers.....

One law for them & one for us? Civil War here we come...& personally I would love that to occur......

I guess it depends on what we mean by far reaching, Chris said "far reaching effects upon the UK, and indeed maybe upon other countries", and it was his reference to other countries that lead us down a merry diversion :-).

Should the Dale Farm travellers win their case, their grounds for doing so should be available to all residents of Basildon, under the rules of case law (a.k.a. precendent). I'd imagine it's possible, though I have no idea how likely, that the case creates new law for England and Wales. I do not believe this case could create new law for Scotland or Northern Island. It's been a very long time since I had to study law books, so I may be incorrect on some of the details, if anybody knows better, I'd welcome their additions.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

That Mr Cottle has said that it is "arguable" does not mean that Mr Cottle, or indeed anyone else, has made the argument in court. A banner does not indicate anything other than the banner maker can use tools. It may well be that the legal teams are intending to submit such arguments, though I do not believe we have any evidence for them having done so to date. I guess, with Chris's permission, we could have a hypothetical discussion about the merits of making such a case.

I can't find any reference to an argument for their Human Rights being raised in court. But Cottle has referenced this act so looking to see if it provides some kind of umbrella of protection for these people. The banner shows what the defendants consider to be a possible umbrella too. But what the public don't wish to see is this act used to protect law breakers from having to abide by the rulings of our courts. If the final case goes against these travelers then if their legal team feels they have protection under the Human Rights act we will see evidence in this with a case being presented in Strasbourg. A picture paints a thousand words so I think we may know whats on these travelers minds. Yet we don't know if they have a case to be able to claim a violation of their rights. Hopefully we shall have an answer some time on Thursday, one way or another.

Should the Dale Farm travellers win their case, their grounds for doing so should be available to all residents of Basildon, under the rules of case law (a.k.a. precendent). I'd imagine it's possible, though I have no idea how likely, that the case creates new law for England and Wales. I do not believe this case could create new law for Scotland or Northern Island. It's been a very long time since I had to study law books, so I may be incorrect on some of the details, if anybody knows better, I'd welcome their additions.

Case Law I believe is more about how judges interpret the law and then how it should be applied to individual circumstances. It tends to set a precedent that the legal fraternity can lay reference too in support of a case. Laws in the UK are produced under statute and judges, by their rulings, can have influence on the formulation of new laws or the amendments to existing laws. A good example of case law V statute law comes with the current trend of our courts in not finding people for killing burglars who enter their properties. It has been muted by the current UK P.M. that he wished to see this made law, so burglars watch out!