Does anyone else think that the Human Rights Act is a criminal's charter?

Question

The Human Rights Act has eroded the common law which protected us all, destroying a delicate balance of law developed through centuries of compromise between all strata of society.

Those who do not keep the peace put themselves outside the King's grace and should not be allowed to benefit from the protection of those laws until such time as justice has been fully done.

I care not to live or hold converse with men so fickle and false as thee.

Answer 1

Well I sincerely hope you are never accused of a crime you never committed because you may find the prospect of the right to a fair trial quite appealing.

The Human Rights Act is not an instrument to protect criminals, it's there to ensure EVERYONE is protected, the guilty and the innocent.

... Actually, after having answered this question something else occured to me. Are you aware that the criminal justice system in the UK has been radically reformed? A defendant's 'bad character' in terms of previous convictions and previous misconduct can now be adduced against him/her far easier than it could in the past? Previous convictions need not be 'strkingly similar' to the current charge they are facing for it to be adduced (or the defendant makes an attack on a prosecution witnesses charater or he attempts to put forward his own good character). The mere fact that he has previous conviction(s) of a similar nature to the current charge can render that conviction being adduced against him (there are also other ways in which his previous can be adduced but I don't want to go into it now).

This is due to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and one could look it and say: 'it's a good thing because it means if a jury knows from the outset a defendant's previous criminal history they are more likely to convict', or: 'it's bad news because it erodes the concept if innocent until proven guilty because a jury is more likely to find him guilty on the basis of his previous convictions as opposed to focusing on the present charge.'

So it could be said that criminals are actually now in for a tougher time in securing an acquittal due to these reforms and that legislation is now more in favour of the prosecution in allowing to dwell into a defendant's past.

Also, citizens can now be arrested for ANY offence provding the police can show it was 'necessary' to arrest that person as opposed to the previous legislation which contained classifications of offences which were 'arrestable'. So the police now have greater powers in terms of arresting someone. (This is contained in the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005).

Sorry this is a long-winded answer but I am just trying to illustrate tthe other side of the coin and that criminals, particularly those with a criminal history, aren't as protected by legislation as much as they used to be.

Answer 2

No it has not, as i answered before, in law you can derogate from certain areas of the HRA if national interests override the interest of the individual.

As i have said time and time again you get sucked into the media hype if you know how many unreported cases are dismissed on HRA claims then you would understand what i am saying.

The fair trial as the person above goes back to almost the century in a famous case everyone should be treated within the law,
you cannot remove, the protection by law even if they have broken the law.
It is because the media hypes the cr*p out of case why a criminal wins, so blame the media not the judges! How can you get an impartial trial when any jury cannot be found which has not been influenced by the media.

Answer 3

Actually, we should be out of the E.U. and back in our Monarchs Commonwealth.. Our Monarch has the title of being our "Defender of our Faith" and our Monarch has the "letter patent" on our A.K.J.V. -the Holy Bible - so why not use it as God has given us our Human Rights ? The Glorious Qur'an is a continuation of the Holy Bible - so the UNITED NATIONS is a farce - and Israel has "missed the boat" - Their "Six Day War" shouldn't have happened. Deuteronomy 17 v 16 -and what a good thing Christ is due soon - and not too happy either - we having a lot in 'English'. The future is for us to be Islamic Christians - And I bet we don't go round the Sun..

Answer 4

It has not eroded common law. Where is the common law that was incontrast to the European Convention of Human Rights Articles that the HUman Rights Act 1998 gives effect to? Where in common law does it say that we are allowed to, eg Torture criminals? I do think that it has become the joke of the justice system, with criminal defense lawyers pushing that their defendant had an unfair trial contrary to article 5 (i think) of the ECHR just as an example.

Answer 5

The effect of the Act answers this question. A group of Afghanis who hijacked an airliner forced it to the UK and then withstood an armed siege for a number of days. They then surrendered, were arrested and convicted. Subsequently they were THEN given the right to remain in this country and enjoy the same rights as you and I because of the HRA. There cannot be another country in the world where that would be the case. If the HRA allows people to force their way using firearms into the UK and then remain here, it must be bad legislation.

Answer 6

I believe in the human rights act just because someone has committed a crime does not mean they are not entitled to be treated humanely. If the criminals did not have these rights then surely that would make us no better than them?
As hard as it is at times there has to be basic human rights for all

Answer 7

Yes, it's total bollocks, there seems to be a hell of a lot of people who care about the treatment of criminals and no-one cares about the victims. Probably says something about the sort of people who go in for law degrees.

Answer 8

I think that act is BS. Do you think they are really caring for prisoners. The goverment doesn't even care for non-criminals. The goverment only cares about control and thats it. Here's a question. Do we ever own something free and clear of any liens absolutely?

Answer 9

There are an awful lot of you sitting there and shouting the odds at the lawyer because of this act. Let me just remind you, it was this duly appointed government who brought in this legislation NOT any lawyer or judge.

Answer 10

It depends if you are in the right category of humans that is entitled to it or else you might be accorded animal rights or worse still you get no rights.