Human rights act
Extracts from this document...
Introduction
Is the "Human Rights Act 1998" Ethical? The Human Rights Act 1998 is a United Kingdom Act of Parliament which received Royal Assent on November 9, 1998, and came into force on October 2, 2000. Its aim is to enforce UK law to the rights enclosed in the European Convention on Human Rights. The Act provides UK courts with a solution for breach of a Convention right, without the need to go to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. It also completely got rid of the death penalty in UK law. This Act makes it unlawful for any public body to act in a way which is incompatible with the Law, unless the wording of an Act of Parliament means they have no other choice. It also requires UK judges to take account of decisions of the Strasbourg court, and to interpret legislation, as far as possible, in a way which is compatible with the Convention. Human rights are basic freedoms that all people in democratic countries are entitled to enjoy. ...read more.
Middle
like an individual's action, which in itself is pretty neutral in content and may be for the good of him/herself but may disturb the other person's rights, so it also goes against human rights. For example, an "artist's" rights are for the artist alone, as long as the person is an artist he has those rights, which others have to take into account and comply with fully. Art 2 Sec 1 states that "Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law." And on the other hand abortion is legal. Babies are human beings therefore the law should apply to them as well. Art 5 Sec 1 states "Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person." in conjunction with Art 6 Sec 1 stating "In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. These sections of the act were breached on the "Stag Case" where he was unfairly convicted of murdered and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. ...read more.
Conclusion
One should not be judged by someone else's' actions. Hitler was Christian and yet no one mentioned a "war on Christianity". Art 12 states that "Men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family, according to the national laws governing the exercise of this right." Although Gay marriages have been made legal recently, this section does not protect them or mention them at all which also break the law under article 14 which states that "The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status." In conclusion to all the above, I would like to state that The Human Rights Act only protects a certain groups of people that interest the British government. I find the whole act very hypocritical and not well enforced. People should be treated as individuals according to their own circumstances and not as members of a certain group. ...read more.
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