Site Meter

Wednesday, March 02, 2011

Europe must stand up to the bullying UK dictator!

Europe must stand up to the bullying UK dictator!

It makes me so angry when I read the following...

Prisoner Voting

Mr Marsden: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will publish the legal advice he has received on compliance with rulings of the European Court of Human Rights on prisoner voting. [42564]

Mr Harper: The Government do not disclose their legal advice. Disclosure of legal advice could prejudice the Government's ability to defend their legal interests.

The Government have requested that the court's judgment in the "Greens and MT" case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)-the highest tier of the ECtHR. If the Grand Chamber agrees to the referral, they will look again at the judgment and issue their opinion.

The basis of the Government's referral request is that we believe that the court should look again at the principles in "Hirst" which outlaws a blanket ban on prisoners voting, particularly given the recent debate in the House of Commons. The referral request also points out the need for clarity in the ECtHR's case law in this area.


Gavin Williamson: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what plans he has for prisoners with no fixed abode under his proposals to extend the franchise to certain prisoners. [41896]

Mr Harper: The Government are considering the next steps in relation to the European Court of Human Rights' judgments against the UK, and will reflect carefully on the points made in the House of Commons backbench debate on 10 February 2011 in deciding how to respond.

The UK lost Hirst v UK (No2) in the Chamber on 30 March 2004. The UK then appealed against the Chamber decision to the Grand Chamber on 6 October 2005 and lost its appeal.

According to the European Convention the Grand Chamber decision is final.

According to the UK, we don't like the fact that we have lost the case therefore we want the Grand Chamber in Greens and MT v UK to overturn the Grand Chamber decision in Hirst v UK (No2).

What part of you lost does the UK not understand?

Ministers' Deputies

Information documents

CM/Inf(2004)8 Final 7 April 2004

Human rights working methods -
Improved effectiveness of the Committee of Ministers' supervision of execution of judgments

Appendix I

Guidelines for the Chair on the conduct of Committee of Ministers Human Rights meetings

2. Code of good practice

Participants should avoid addressing arguments already rejected by the Court

So, the UK wants the Court to ignore its own decision in favour of arguments already rejected by the Court which have been rehashed in the Commons by some backbench MPs?

If the Court, Council of Europe, and Committee of Ministers do not stand up to the bullying dictatorial attitude from the UK then all is lost. The Council of Europe was set up to combat totalitarian regimes, so to now bow down to one after 60 years will mean that it has all been a big waste of time. The European Convention on Human Rights will be unenforceable, and the European Court of Human Rights decision will be unenforceable.

On 8 March the Committee of Ministers must lay down specifically that either the Secretary of State for Justice must make a remedial order under s.10 of the HRA 1998 to amend s.3 of ROPA 1983 and lay iyt before Parliament, or Hirst v UK (No2) will go back to the Court for a ruling of non-compliance and then the Committee of Ministers must suspend or expel the UK from the Council of Europe.

No comments: