Britain is leading the charge against basic human rights says Amnesty International

Monkeynut said:
Legal representation for everyone is pretty important...
Click to expand...

It is important but it's not a human right to have somebody else pay your legal bill. Access to justice is very good in this country (comparatively speaking) anyway and legal aid does still exist, it's just reduced in scope!
 
arknor said:
The right to a fair trial? it's hardly fair if one side is lawyered up and the other can't afford one.

it's why you get "just plead guilty for the lesser sentence" and people getting tricked into confessions
Click to expand...

What if the CPS refuse to prosecute a criminal due to budget constraints rather than justice?

Why does the criminal get legal aid but the victims family has to pay for a private prosecution?

How is that fair?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...e-private-prosecution-revolution-9672543.html
 
While surveillance is indeed a problem (a legacy begun under Labour, in part due to the change in technology/terrorist activity but also something they could have prevented). I'm highly sceptical we are leading the way to a 'failing on human rights' when we have excellent provision for the disabled (compared to many EU nations) a welfare state, national heath-care & recently some huge leaps forward in equality.

The reduction in legal aid is of course a serious issue.
 
[TW]Fox;27680637 said:
'Reduction of access to justice' - presumably they are talking about legal aid?

So not paying somebodies legal bills is an 'assault of human rights'?
Click to expand...

And employment tribunal fees.

I mean, you've been unfairly sacked, you've no job and no redundancy pay - why wouldn't you want to spend £1000 on bringing an ET claim?
 
Monkeynut said:
Legal representation for everyone is pretty important...
Click to expand...

Bw0sfG8.jpg
 
cheesyboy said:
Access to legal council, given the requirement of professional knowledge in judicial representation, certainly is tied in with the human right of access to justice. And lawyers charge fees commensurate with their professional standing. Take away access to free legal council, and you take away access to justice for many people.

How can you contemplate otherwise?
Click to expand...

He has a point.
 
cheesyboy said:
Access to legal council, given the requirement of professional knowledge in judicial representation, certainly is tied in with the human right of access to justice. And lawyers charge fees commensurate with their professional standing. Take away access to free legal council, and you take away access to justice for many people.

How can you contemplate otherwise?
Click to expand...
Because justice for poor people is dirty left-wing hippy socialism.

Have a wash....






:D
 
elmarko said:
Because justice for poor people is dirty left-wing hippy socialism.
Click to expand...

You've managed to miss the point. Access to justice for all is obviously an important part of a democratic society but that doesn't make free legal representation a 'human right'. There are lots of important aspects of our society which are not necessarily human rights - there is no 'human right' of job seekers allowance for example but it is correct and appropriate that our society provides such a thing.
 
[TW]Fox;27681465 said:
You've managed to miss the point. Access to justice for all is obviously an important part of a democratic society but that doesn't make free legal representation a 'human right'. There are lots of important aspects of our society which are not necessarily human rights - there is no 'human right' of job seekers allowance for example but it is correct and appropriate that our society provides such a thing.
Click to expand...

I would say that not being falsely imprisoned is a human right.

Access to justice is one of the pillars of democracy and the Tories are trying to take it away from the most vulnerable in society. We're heading towards a system where only the rich have access to justice. Doesn't that scare you?

The government is also trying to limit ordinary people challenging their actions. Not through acting in a legal manner but by putting severe limits on legal action. Doesn't that also scare you?

These massive changes to our legal system are being designed by the least qualified Lord Chancellor in 400 years and the least distinguished Attorney General in 200 years. Doesn't that scare you?

The problem with justice is that people are complacent about it until they need it.
 
[TW]Fox;27681465 said:
there is no 'human right' of job seekers allowance for example but it is correct and appropriate that our society provides such a thing.
Click to expand...

Except, of course, the "right to social security" is actually one of the basic human rights.
 
Further proof that in this day and age we need to stop giving as much importance and relevance to these so-called "human rights" organisations. Yes real human rights are important but when all the important ones are achieved groups like Amnesty are motivated to make up new ones and get all hysterical about them.
 
scorza said:
Further proof that in this day and age we need to stop giving as much importance and relevance to these so-called "human rights" organisations. Yes real human rights are important but when all the important ones are achieved groups like Amnesty are motivated to make up new ones and get all hysterical about them.
Click to expand...

The basic human rights we are talking about are as agreed by the UN. They're anything but unreasonable.
 
Hikari Kisugi said:
Because as a taxpayer I can't afford to pay for my own legal representation and in my taxes afford to ay for those who don't pay taxes also? Where is my right to not have my own money taken from me and wasted on criminals?
Click to expand...

How have you made the leap that someone who requires legal aid is automatically a criminal?
 
How do you know that the population of the country are even human? I mean, all these immigrants coming over here taking our jewwwbs could be aliens bred by North Korea and the CCTV is in place as a means of controlling the 'prawns'.

*This opinion is not my own, is completely fictitious and slightly funny. Terms and conditions apply, see in store for details. Offer ends 25/02/15. Regulated by Jokecom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom