Some real food for thought here (well worth reading; scope for much discussion – thanks to SpinningHugo. I hope he (?) does not mind me re-blogging this.)
I am, on balance, in favour of the Human Rights Act, and think that the European Convention on Human Rights has made the world a better place. Whilst the European Court of Human Rights is capable of improvement, it is institutionally necessary if the open textured rights in the Convention are to be meaningful. Without such a central court, signatory states could each adopt their own idiosyncratic interpretations, and the entire purpose of the Convention defeated.
But, the case for the Convention is not as easy and obvious as its supporters sometimes believe. Two examples of such over confidence are
in today’s Independent and Guardian.
Bad Argument One: Human Rights are Universal
The label ‘Human’ rights is deeply misleading. It lays claim to the idea that these rights are common to all human beings in all times and places. An examination of the…
View original post 2,055 more words