Immigration - United Nations & the HR Act

General and Other Policy
, ,
1

United Nations and the Human Rights act is inadvertently enabling tyrannical leaders and terrorist groups to manipulate the system. It needs repealing and or revising. These organisations policies have a knock on effect with migration, extremist ideology being spread to Europe and a negative economic effect on the whole world.

4 Likes
2

I believe ive not been active enough to post policies but here is my punt at this one. It is a subject i have studied, purely out of interest fr many years.
The UK Human Rights Act has significant short comings that require reform. Many people will take the view, as I do, that as the country that effectively founded the concept of Common Law rights about a thousand years ago Human rights are surplus to requirements and the act itself should be withdrawn. However I also believe that politically that is not possible/realistic and so a more pragmatic approach is required.

Problem statement:

  1. Article 29, Para. 1 of the UNDOHR states that “Everyone has duties to their community only in which their full human development is possible”. What this means is that you have the right to grow yourself into the best version of yourself that you can be and the ONLY way you do this is by taking on responsibility for that and many other things and for yourself. This by necessity requires a smaller state and greater emphasis on personal moral agency. Para. 2 also states that “Society shall only be subject to such restrictions as required for maintenance of public order and civil society.” Again the emphasis is that the state should only become as big and inclusive as it needs to be to. It should surprise no one to learn that Article 29 did not make it into the Tony Blairs 1997 UK Human Rights Act, or as it should be now more accurately known “Human Rights Reduction Act”. To be clear Article 29 was not even included in the 1952 European Convention on Human Rights that is the founding document of the ECHR.
  2. Another part of the 1948 UNDOHR that is not included in the UK legislation is the right to be “…free from arbitrary attacks on your honour and reputation.” (Part of Article 12.)This is extremely convenient because this right would render NCHI’s and their like illegal as a clear breach of this particular freedom.
  3. The UK Human Rights was incorporated specifically to supersede and take supremacy over Traditional Common Law Rights.
  4. In theory all Rights are considered equal, while none should be absolute in all contexts. In reality all these rights can conflict with each other and which one wins in any context should depend on that context, the particular right in question and who and how many people it affects. In practice some rights, one in particular, have been informally elevated over all others such that we currently live in a tyranny of Equality. Some rights and freedoms while not being absolute are more important than others, being the cornerstones of our values, if we are to continue to maintain the culture of a liberal, pluralistic democracy (please note use of liberal with a non-capitalised “l”)
  5. Because of the above emphasis on Equality, Human Rights are being practiced such that they only protect minority groups with a history of being marginalised or oppressed. Article 29 Para 3. Is very clear “The above rights shall not be used for purposes they were not intended.” Human rights not only exist for everyone, but I would argue specifically exist to protect the majority from aggressive politically motivated minority groups. They are currently being used for the direct opposite of this, to allow politically motivated minorities to bully and oppress the majority.

Solution:

  1. Undertake a full review of the UK Human Rights act to:
  2. Clearly state that it no longer takes supremacy over British Common Law, but sits alongside it and is simply part of the same proud tradition;
  3. Identify any rights that have been removed or reduced in the transition from the 1948 UNDOHR to the 1997 UK Human Rights act; as per Article 29 and 12 as outlined above;
  4. Redraft the UK Human Rights act incorporating all aspects of the 1688 Bill of Rights and fill the gaps identified in point b. above. Particular emphasis should be put on ensuring Article 29 UNDOHR is included in full;
  5. Clarify that Equality in the context of Human Rights means equality of process, and specifically excludes Equality of outcome.
  6. Undertake a widespread publicity campaign to “raise awareness” of how the 1997 act actually removed and reduced UK human Rights, and how with its emphasis to include Article 29 plus, it now represents a higher standard of rights than the European Convention espoused by the ECHR;
  7. Use the evidence of point 2. to withdraw from the ECHR;
  8. Require that in any individual Human Rights judgement by any court include an impact statement demonstrating that the judgement does not breach Article 20 Para. 3 (i.e. it does not contradict the spirit and purpose of human rights) and explaining the impact on the human rights of the wider majority and explaining why in this particular context it is the right thing to do that we uphold this individuals rights;
  9. Use this opportunity to re-establish and reset the UK’s traditional and successful culture by nominating 3 particular rights and freedoms that we see as the underpinning of the UK’s historical and future culture and elevate them to the status of “truths that we regard to be self evident” This is in the same spirit of two of the other worlds great but very different democracies, namely France ((Liberty, Equality, Fraternity) and the USA (Life, Libery and the Pursuit of Happiness). My recommendation for these 3 would be: Life, Liberty, Duty! Use this to have a wider countrywide discussion about what these should becand to define out primary duties as uk citizens.
1 Like