Site Meter

Thursday, October 14, 2010

All is not fair in sport and law on human rights!

All is not fair in sport and law on human rights!

Cameron hosts World Cup boss

ENGLAND became clear favourites to host the 2018 World Cup yesterday after the Fifa president backed our bid and said: "England is the motherland of football."

I have got something on my mind. And reading this in relation to forward planning it appears that we are jumping ahead of ourselves to 2018. One thought leads to another, and I wondered when we won the London 2012 Olympic bid? "On 6 July 2005 at its 117th Session in Singapore, the IOC awarded the London Bid with the rights to host the Games of the XXX Olympiad".

Construction workers chat outside the Aquatics centre at the 2012 Olympics site in east London July 27, 2010. Credit: Reuters/Suzanne Plunkett

Before you think I have come over all sporty...

On 30 March 2004 Prisoners must get right to vote, says court.

On 31 March 2004 at 15.45 the UK Prime Minister's official briefings...

"Asked the Prime Minister’s reaction to an ECHR ruling today that murderers held in prison should be allowed to vote in elections, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that we would consider the detail of today’s judgement. However, it had been the view of successive Governments that prisoners convicted of a crime serious enough to warrant imprisonment had lost the moral authority to vote. That remained our position. Asked to explain why prisoners had lost the moral authority to vote, the PMOS said that they had carried out criminal activities which had been judged to be sufficiently serious by a court to warrant imprisonment. That judgment related to how society viewed these matters. Asked if the Government would appeal against the decision, the PMOS said that we would take time to consider the detail of the judgment before announcing what we were going to do".

The UK decided to appeal to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights. On 6 October 2005 the GC published its decision that the UK had lost its appeal and the Chamber decision stands.

How is it that the UK can respond far quicker to a decision made in relation to sport on 6 July 2005, than it can on a decision made in relation to human rights on 6 October 2005?

No comments: