Helga Law Journal

Ukioqatigiit
Ataaseq assigiiaat ilaat

Helga Law Journal - 01.01.2021, Qupperneq 146

Helga Law Journal - 01.01.2021, Qupperneq 146
Helga Law Journal Vol. 1, 2021 150 International Legal Research Group 151 is one of the articles which is excluded from the HRA since its very own implementation is seen as securing this, especially within Smith and Grady v UK,97 where it was held that judicial review does not provide an effective remedy due to the fact that the irrationality standard is too high thus requiring the courts to carry out more intensive reviews of each case.98 Many hold the view that the very narrow character of judicial review proceedings does not make them suitable for the resolution of human rights issues.99 2.5 Conclusion In conclusion, the remedies provided are limited in their effectiveness. The process and procedure which is required of the individual is difficult and complex and portrays itself as being designed in order to deter complaints of human rights violations. Assuming the claimant is successful, the remedies are limited by the constitutional structure of our legal system which provides the option of simply declaring itself incompatible with human rights. Judicial review may be seen as an alternative option, however, it too throws up issues of procedure as well as being narrow in its analysis, failing to provide an effective alternative for the weaknesses within the default system of seeking an effective remedy. When returning to the beginning of these sections, it was held that a balance is often struck, and when this balance is left uneven the remedy should aim to correct it. 3 What is the impact of the European Convention on Human Rights and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the right to protest in your country? 3.1 Introduction The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was ratified by the UK in 1951, making it the first country to do so.100 However, it was not until 1966 that the UK accepted the right of individuals to challenge the state in the European Courts of Human Rights (ECtHR) regarding claims of human rights violations.101 The ability of individuals to challenge the UK in Strasbourg ensured that any human rights violations committed by the UK could be held to account by the ECtHR. In this regard, the introduction of the ECHR has not only 97 Smith and Grady v The United Kingdom [1999] ECHR 27 Sep 1999. 98 ibid (n 22) Fenwick et al 176. 99 ibid (n 13) 522. 100 Chart of signatures and ratifications of Treaty 005, Council of Europe,(n.d.). Retrieved July 01, 2018, from https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/- /conventions/treaty/005/signatures?p_auth=r0w2hXdi. 101 Alice Donald, Jane Gordon, and Philip Leach, ‘The UK and the European Court of Human Rights’ [2012] Research Report 83 The Equality and Human Rights Commission v-vi. changed the British legal system’s approach to the right to protest but all human rights claim incorporated within the ECHR. 3.2 How has the ECHR Affected the UK Domestic Legal System Generally? The introduction of the right of individual petitions to the ECHR demonstrated the occasional limitations of the common law in protecting human rights and civil liberties. The British Courts have a rather checkered track record in protecting human rights and civil liberties through the common law. Whilst cases such as Entick v Carrington102 do demonstrate the existence of “fundamental Common Law right(s),”103 the effectiveness of the British courts can be sometimes be questioned. For example, in Malone v Metropolitan Police Commissioner,104 Malone was subject to police wire-tapping through his telephones lines by the police outside his property. The High Court failed to find any violation of the right to respect for privacy under Article 8 of the ECHR. However, when the case was taken to the ECtHR, Malone was successful.105 For example, in the 1942 case of Liversidge v Anderson,106 the House of Lords concerned “the power of the Home Secretary to intern persons where there was a reasonable suspicion that they posed a threat to national security.”107 The House of Lords decided that the Home Secretary should be allowed to exercise this power; it was characterised as a dismissal of the rule of law both by their contemporaries and later legal scholars.108 Any discussion in the respect of how the ECHR affects the UK system must now be conducted with the Human Rights Act 1998 in mind. The purpose of the HRA was to give further effect to the rights and freedoms guaranteed under the ECHR.109 Although the declarations do not have legal effect and ultimately rely on government and parliament to usher in the changes required, more often 102 Entick v Carrington [1765] 95 E.R. 807. “The defendants broke into Entick’s home ‘with force and arms’ and then proceeded over the next four hours to break down doors and open locks in an effort to find evidence of seditious libel that could lead to a criminal prosecution,” Richard Epstein, ‘Entick v Carrington and Boyd v United States: Keeping the Fourth and Fifth Amendments on Track’ [2015] 82(1) The University of Chicago Law Review 27. 103 Robert Alderson Wright, ‘Liberty and the Common Law’ [1945] 9(1) The Cambridge Law Journal 2, 6. 104 Malone v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1979] Ch. 344 105 Malone v United Kingdom (1984) 7 EHRR 14. 106 Liversidge Appellant v Sir John Anderson and Another Respondents [1942] A.C. 206. 107 Francis Bennion, ‘The terrorists should not be allowed to win’ [2004] 13(1) The Commonwealth Lawyer 36, [Abstract]. 108 David Edmond Neuberger, ‘Reflections on the ICLR top fifteen cases: a talk to commemorate the ICLR's 150th anniversary’ [2016] 32(2) Construction Law Journal 149, 162. 109 The HRA makes the rights in the ECHR accessible to people in Britain so that they can be directly relied on in domestic courts, while section 3 requires all British legislation to be read in a way that is compliant with the ECHR, at section 3(1). In addition, section 4 of the HRA grants the courts with the ability to issue declarations of incompatibility when legislation breaches human rights, at section 4(4).
Qupperneq 1
Qupperneq 2
Qupperneq 3
Qupperneq 4
Qupperneq 5
Qupperneq 6
Qupperneq 7
Qupperneq 8
Qupperneq 9
Qupperneq 10
Qupperneq 11
Qupperneq 12
Qupperneq 13
Qupperneq 14
Qupperneq 15
Qupperneq 16
Qupperneq 17
Qupperneq 18
Qupperneq 19
Qupperneq 20
Qupperneq 21
Qupperneq 22
Qupperneq 23
Qupperneq 24
Qupperneq 25
Qupperneq 26
Qupperneq 27
Qupperneq 28
Qupperneq 29
Qupperneq 30
Qupperneq 31
Qupperneq 32
Qupperneq 33
Qupperneq 34
Qupperneq 35
Qupperneq 36
Qupperneq 37
Qupperneq 38
Qupperneq 39
Qupperneq 40
Qupperneq 41
Qupperneq 42
Qupperneq 43
Qupperneq 44
Qupperneq 45
Qupperneq 46
Qupperneq 47
Qupperneq 48
Qupperneq 49
Qupperneq 50
Qupperneq 51
Qupperneq 52
Qupperneq 53
Qupperneq 54
Qupperneq 55
Qupperneq 56
Qupperneq 57
Qupperneq 58
Qupperneq 59
Qupperneq 60
Qupperneq 61
Qupperneq 62
Qupperneq 63
Qupperneq 64
Qupperneq 65
Qupperneq 66
Qupperneq 67
Qupperneq 68
Qupperneq 69
Qupperneq 70
Qupperneq 71
Qupperneq 72
Qupperneq 73
Qupperneq 74
Qupperneq 75
Qupperneq 76
Qupperneq 77
Qupperneq 78
Qupperneq 79
Qupperneq 80
Qupperneq 81
Qupperneq 82
Qupperneq 83
Qupperneq 84
Qupperneq 85
Qupperneq 86
Qupperneq 87
Qupperneq 88
Qupperneq 89
Qupperneq 90
Qupperneq 91
Qupperneq 92
Qupperneq 93
Qupperneq 94
Qupperneq 95
Qupperneq 96
Qupperneq 97
Qupperneq 98
Qupperneq 99
Qupperneq 100
Qupperneq 101
Qupperneq 102
Qupperneq 103
Qupperneq 104
Qupperneq 105
Qupperneq 106
Qupperneq 107
Qupperneq 108
Qupperneq 109
Qupperneq 110
Qupperneq 111
Qupperneq 112
Qupperneq 113
Qupperneq 114
Qupperneq 115
Qupperneq 116
Qupperneq 117
Qupperneq 118
Qupperneq 119
Qupperneq 120
Qupperneq 121
Qupperneq 122
Qupperneq 123
Qupperneq 124
Qupperneq 125
Qupperneq 126
Qupperneq 127
Qupperneq 128
Qupperneq 129
Qupperneq 130
Qupperneq 131
Qupperneq 132
Qupperneq 133
Qupperneq 134
Qupperneq 135
Qupperneq 136
Qupperneq 137
Qupperneq 138
Qupperneq 139
Qupperneq 140
Qupperneq 141
Qupperneq 142
Qupperneq 143
Qupperneq 144
Qupperneq 145
Qupperneq 146
Qupperneq 147
Qupperneq 148
Qupperneq 149
Qupperneq 150
Qupperneq 151
Qupperneq 152
Qupperneq 153
Qupperneq 154
Qupperneq 155
Qupperneq 156
Qupperneq 157
Qupperneq 158
Qupperneq 159
Qupperneq 160
Qupperneq 161
Qupperneq 162
Qupperneq 163
Qupperneq 164
Qupperneq 165
Qupperneq 166
Qupperneq 167
Qupperneq 168
Qupperneq 169
Qupperneq 170
Qupperneq 171
Qupperneq 172
Qupperneq 173
Qupperneq 174
Qupperneq 175
Qupperneq 176
Qupperneq 177
Qupperneq 178
Qupperneq 179
Qupperneq 180
Qupperneq 181
Qupperneq 182
Qupperneq 183
Qupperneq 184
Qupperneq 185
Qupperneq 186
Qupperneq 187
Qupperneq 188
Qupperneq 189
Qupperneq 190
Qupperneq 191
Qupperneq 192
Qupperneq 193
Qupperneq 194
Qupperneq 195
Qupperneq 196
Qupperneq 197
Qupperneq 198
Qupperneq 199
Qupperneq 200
Qupperneq 201
Qupperneq 202
Qupperneq 203
Qupperneq 204
Qupperneq 205
Qupperneq 206
Qupperneq 207
Qupperneq 208
Qupperneq 209
Qupperneq 210
Qupperneq 211
Qupperneq 212
Qupperneq 213
Qupperneq 214
Qupperneq 215
Qupperneq 216
Qupperneq 217
Qupperneq 218
Qupperneq 219
Qupperneq 220
Qupperneq 221
Qupperneq 222
Qupperneq 223
Qupperneq 224

x

Helga Law Journal

Direct Links

Hvis du vil linke til denne avis/magasin, skal du bruge disse links:

Link til denne avis/magasin: Helga Law Journal
https://timarit.is/publication/1677

Link til dette eksemplar:

Link til denne side:

Link til denne artikel:

Venligst ikke link direkte til billeder eller PDfs på Timarit.is, da sådanne webadresser kan ændres uden advarsel. Brug venligst de angivne webadresser for at linke til sitet.