• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Case for a Bill of Rights

Extracts from this document...


Case for A Bill of Rights Currently within British politics there is controversy over the Issue of whether or not the UK Government should introduce a Bill of Rights. There are members or both the Tory and Labour parities that are for and against the Introduction of this document, David Cameron in particular is In favour of the introduction, claiming that 'current legislation is inadequate and hinders the fight against crime and terrorism.' (BBC NEWS) It is said that he believes the current Human Rights Act, which was established in 2000 has strong weaknesses which need to be addressed. However, others believe that those in favour of the Bill or Rights and against the Human Rights Act are simply so due to the fact that the Human Rights Act 'seem inconvenient' according to the Lord Chancellor. The most important reason why the Bill or Rights should be introduced is because with an entrenched document within the law with exact rules and regulations, the Government would not at any one point take away the civil liberties of UK Citizens. ...read more.


Recently, there have been cases in which criminals, such as terrorists and murderers, have claimed that the Human Rights Act protects them again deportation. In one case, a criminal claimed that his family that he was close to lived in England, and he would be psychologically affected had he been forced to move back to Italy to stay with his other family. The fourth and final reason of importance as to why the Bill of Rights should be introduced is that 'the rule of law' demands a clear statement of citizens rights and duties, which Britain is yet to gain. The population of England, Scotland and Wales do not have anywhere they can go to find their rights if they wish to, as the Americans can. There are no rules or rights given to UK Citizens that are set in stone, which is crucial for a population to have full faith In their Government. The most important reason why the Bill of Rights should not be introduced is because the law within Britain is contradictive of itself and in many cases loopholes are found in the Governments favour, if a Bill of Rights was written, it would be entrenched, concise and precise. ...read more.


The UK is known across the world for being a state where freedom is a priority. However, if a Bill of Rights was ensued, these freedoms would be largely restrained as the rights of the population were regulated and defined. Overall, the argument for a Bill of Rights is far stronger than that against, however the case against a Bill of Rights also has a number of highly valid points which are to be considered. For example, the fact that the rights to be entrenched would be decided by someone currently unknown to the public. Would the Government decide as a whole which rights to embed within the legal system? There would be major disagreements within Government if this were to be the case as the final outcome of these decisions would affect the UK for the rest of the country's existence. The Bill of Rights does seem to be, however, currently a resolution to many problems being faced by the Government and the state. If the safety of the people really is coming to be less important than the rights of an individual as written in the Human Rights Act, the UK are well on their way to self-destruction. Lucy Dark 6L0 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Sources of Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Sources of Law essays

  1. Human Rights

    ranging from six months to twelve years."4 The repercussions and sanctions under this Act ultimately dispel the belief that child sex tourists will not be held accountable for their actions, thus the sanctions create a reasonably effective legal measure. Conversely, The Crimes (Child Sex Tourism)

  2. Law case study

    The Children (Scotland) Act 1995 saw a change in direction especially in the terminology used. This was a move towards a more child centered approach, without losing the purpose that parents still have rights towards their children. What did change was more emphasis on responsibility.

  1. Extradition of terrorists

    'whether the prosecution evidence, taken at its highest, is such that no jury properly directed could properly convict upon it.' Important case law surrounding liability for extradition and relevant to this area of law can be found in the case of Re Ismail3 where it was held that extradition is


    1 Spanish Dollars). The initial application of paper money In spite of the fact that "Nova Scotia was little affected by the war, the colonial authorities developed a taste for paper money as a means of financing public works and continued to issue new series of Treasury notes after the war.

  1. How has the European Court of Human Rights contributed to the protection of children's ...

    This approach implies that reasonable parental measures against child's will, denying him autonomy, do not breach his privacy right. Bainham47 argues that Court's fitting of child's interests into balancing exercise fails to empower them with Art. 8 rights as such, regardless how much weight is attached to their welfare.


    been used in many contexts or given another meaning before applied to the issue at hand. An example is, when cultural rights were recognised in Article 15 of the ICESCR, where culture was first defined as a way of life reflecting and shaping life of a community, before applied.

  1. The right to a fair trial is one of the key points established within ...

    Section 1 defined terrorism broadly. It has been argued that the definition is too broad, to the extent that it could include those who cause damage to fields in a campaign against GM crops, or some relatively minor aspects of pro- or anti-hunting campaigns.

  2. Should people have a right to privacy?

    On the other hand celebrities being hounded to death during periods of their life seems to amount to harassment. Children should have a right to privacy well in excess of an adult.? Controversially, it is now possible for one to be granted anonymity to protect ones privacy which is known as a super-injunction, the most effective injunction.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work