Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Right to Life

Right to Life

Postby shootist » Fri Oct 27, 2017 7:50 am

Not exactly the heart of the topic, but I was interested to read the following extract from the Human Rights Act, incorporated into the law of this country.

“1. Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.
2. Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this Article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:
(a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;
(b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;
(c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.”


At first sight, this seems to run contrary to our laws on the use of force, and some decided cases that speak of reasonable belief in the need for force and similar standards.
Last edited by atticus on Fri Oct 27, 2017 8:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Separated from a topic about a case on discrimination on grounds of belief.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death my right to be offended by it."
User avatar
shootist
 
Posts: 3620
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Right to Life

Postby theycantdothat » Fri Oct 27, 2017 3:35 pm

shootist wrote:...the Human Rights Act, incorporated into the law of this country.


Assuming you mean the Act incorporates the Convention into UK law, that is not the case. The UK law remains supreme. What the Act does is impose on the courts an obligation to give effect to legislation in a way which is compatible with the Convention. If unable to do so, a declaration of incompatibility may be made and it is then up to Parliament whether or not to change the law. The thrust of the Act was to allow citizens to argue their rights in the UK courts - something they could not do previously as the Convention did not have the force of domestic law. Before the Act was passed, there were more applications to the ECHR by British citizens than all the other states which ratified the Convention put together - rather ironical considering that the Convention rights are strongly influenced by the British tradition of civil liberties.
theycantdothat
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 7:36 pm

Re: Right to Life

Postby atticus » Fri Oct 27, 2017 3:59 pm

... and that British jurists played a significant part in the drafting of the Convention.
atticus - a very stable genius
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 20112
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Right to Life

Postby dls » Fri Oct 27, 2017 5:00 pm

The Convention applies to the actions of the states signing up to it. The generallaw of self defence relates to the actions of individuals. Any conflict would be likely to be indirect.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12339
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Right to Life

Postby theycantdothat » Fri Oct 27, 2017 5:45 pm

atticus wrote:... and that British jurists played a significant part in the drafting of the Convention.


Indeed. We can even say: Conservative (with a capital "C") British jurists played a significant part in the drafting of the Convention.
theycantdothat
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 7:36 pm


Return to Human Rights Law

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest