• Our Cynicism

    I think we had a reasonably good day at the Diocesan Synod last weekend. A large part of the day was given over to discussion about poverty, welfare reforms and the consequences of government policy.

    The only thing that started to make me feel a little uncomfortable is something which has been getting to me in a number of gatherings recently – what feels like a disconnect between decent people and the political process.

    I was co-facilitating the large group discussion on Saturday afternoon and was working pretty much to a script. I found some questions arising in me though that went neither asked nor answered.

    I wanted to stop the discussion for a moment and ask, “How many people here feel they don’t trust politicians to make the right decisions?”

    It isn’t possible to be certain but I suspect from what I was hearing discussed in other parts of the day, that it would be a quite a strong majority of the people there.

    I’d have followed it up with a supplementary question, “How many of us have written to or contacted an MP or MSP in the last six months either about the topics under discussion or about anything else relating to government policy”.

    Would as many hands have been raised?

    All of which leads me to wonder whether the repeated scandals in our institutions seem so compelling to watch unfold because by watching them we feel that it all must be someone else’s fault. If the poor are hungry – it must be the fault of politicians. If I feel uncomfortable by the manner in which the media does its work it must be the fault of journalists. If the economy can’t look after our vulnerable it must be because of the bankers and not my low taxes.

    I’m not saying that we should expect anything less than the highest standards in public life.

    I am suspecting that in order to achieve them we need to be more than mere spectators.

2 responses to “Human Rights Petition”

  1. Steven Avatar
    Steven

    Kelvin

    I strongly agree with your sentiments and intend to sign the petition. As a practising barrister I can say that the incorporation of the Convention has had a hugely beneficial effect across society – especially in creating a rights aware culture amongst the judiciary.

    I have successfully relied on the Convention to (1) ensure that the state continues to support destitute asylum seekers whilst they are appealing an asylum support decision (2) prevent the removal of a mentally unwell Brazilian amputee who is awaiting further surgery in the UK (3) ensured that those detained under immigration powers are not held in “ordinary” prisons and (4) prevented the deportation of a Turkish national for a crime committed whilst a child. The Convention naturally “benefits” those on the edges of society – whose cause might be unpopular. That does not mean, of course, that it is unworthy. Quite the opposite.

    I have of course relied upon the Convention in cases which stretch the reach of the various articles. That is how the law develops. Judges do not embrace such claims uncritically. Unfounded and weak claims are rejected as such and so the public perception of an “out of touch” judiciary is misplaced. Thank God for the Judges who – if they were to follow the whims of public opinion would “string em up”, “bring back the birch” and “throw away the key”!

    The Human Rights Act 1998 still retains parliamentary sovereignty in any event. This means that Parliament can still introduce laws that are in breach of the Convention. All that a Judge can do when faced with such legislation is declare it to be “incompatible” and that is it. This may create political pressure (especially at a European level) but it means that the “Queen in Parliament” is still sovereign.

    In addition the HRA 1998 has become entrenched as an almost constitutional statute. Repeal or significant amendment would not create less litigation. On the contrary, as the Daily Mail might put it, lawyers would have a “field day” arguing about when a particular right ceased to exist under the ECHR in the UK and the extent to which rights survived repeal or amendment. It would create a legal mess, a constitutional back-step and a political nightmare.

    In fairness though a solicitor did ask me if they could bring a case to challenge a refusal by the police to allow a man more regular smoke breaks on the basis of his Convention rights (he was being questioned for murder)…I reminded the solicitor that the drafters of the Convention had in mind the ashes of Auschwitz when drafting the Convention and advised him to, as they say in Ulster, “catch yourself on!”

    1. kelvin Avatar

      Thanks Steven. It us really helpful to have your perspective and some concrete examples.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Interview

    Off to Edinburgh to be interviewed by Inspires, the national magazine of the Scottish Episcopal Church. It is all about politics and faith. Dress like a priest they say. How about a dog collar and a rosette? “Not on your life” says I.

  • Whom she may devour

    Tilly and I have been out in the back garden celebrating St Patrick’s day by chasing away all the snakes. So far, it has worked. I asked Tilly whether she was intending staying outside all day, but she was having none of it. Indeed, she is now applying the same anti-snake treatment to the inside…

  • I was an E-bay virgin

    I am the proud owner of an exercise bike. The “very large rosary beads … for display not devotion” which have cost me ?2.99 should be arriving in the post soon. (I managed to stop myself buying the glow in the dark rosary beads). I wonder whether I will be able to use both purchases…

  • Sunday Times article

    There was an article in the Ecosse section of the Sunday Times this week which featured a number of Scottish Bloggers. There was nothing about this o­ne, but o­ne of my friend's achieved fame or notoriety with this comment.It is difficult to resist the temptation, though, of ?the life and thoughts of an island-hopping minister…