Alas, further misapprehension.

The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU.

It pre-dates the EU, and several signatories (and ratifiers) of the ECHR are not EU members.

Still, “in thrall and subordinate” earns you 10/10 for creative vocabulary. 😉

Be quiet at the back there, Shaw! 😉

I agree with the conclusion at the end of the interesting exchanges between Kev and Phantom, in which they both cited cultural differences for the disparity between US and UK views.

I’m sure you’re right.

I’m always mildly surprised by the number of people – from both sides of the pond – who seem to experience difficulty in understanding that the USA and the UK are completely distinct and separate nations and that there are deep cultural, social and political differences between the two.

You appear to be mistaken again.

Sentencing policy has nothing to do with either the Human Rights Act 1998 or the ECHR.

It is the responsibility of the Lord Chancellor constitutionally, and the Justice Minister in practice. Under current arrangements, these are the same person .

These are matters of fact, not of interpretation.

I do not dignify personal jibes with a response, by the way.

I suppose given that it’s a predominantly British forum I should have known better. 😉

That’s racist, that is! 😡

😀

I’ve never read or heard anyone from the ‘left’ criticising judges for being too ‘right wing’ more especially within the context of sentencing.

That does not mean that it never happens.

People tend to see what they are looking for.

IWhat is apparent from the short time that the Human Rights Act has been incorporated into British law is that that the views of the public are being ignored and consequently the safety of the public is imperilled. That is a fact that cannot be denied.

You seem blissfully unaware of the fact that the Human Rights Act 1998 merely incorporated the protocols of the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law.

The ECHR dates back to 1950, and the UK was a founding member of the Convention had a substantial say in its content.

The UK was amongst the first states to ratify the treaty (in 1953 – ie, 58 years ago) and individuals have had the right to take cases to the European Commission on Human Rights since 1966. (45 years ago.)

Even if the Human Rights Act were to be repealed, the UK would remain a signatory to the Convention and her citizens would still enjoy the protection of the very same provisions that some of you seem to find so objectionable.

The judiciary although purportedly non political, appears to be markedly liberal left in their various adjudications.

Curiously, many on the left criticise judges for their inherent right-wing bias.