B1571 –Human Rights Act 1998 (Amendment) Bill 2020.

Watch
This discussion is closed.
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 months ago
#1
B1571 – Human Rights Act 1998 (Amendment) Bill 2020: Miss Maddie MP


A
BILL
TO

Amend the articles in schedule 1 part 1 and 2 of the Human Rights Act 1998

BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

Amend Article 3 from:

No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

To:

(1) No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
(2) Torture shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this Article when it results from:-
a. torture conducted by alien authorities regardless of whether British authorities were present or the country in which the torture is taking place.

Add to Article 6 (3)c

i. when deportation is being considered following conviction of a crime, the convict will not have access to legal assistance.
ii. legal assistance will not be available for aliens in cases relating to immigration offences or statuses.
iii. legal assistance will not be given to aliens nationals bringing legal proceedings against the the government of the United Kingdom or Ministry of Defence for actions committed by people serving in the United Kingdom's armed forces.
iv. legal assistance will not be available for any crime committed outside the United Kingdom.

Add to Article 8:

(3) Nothing in this section can be used as a defence in any immigration hearing including but not limited to:
a. deportation following conviction of a crime
b. rejection of a visa application
c. rejection of a request to change immigration status
d. when applying for indefinite or temporary leave to remain in the United Kingdom
e. revocation of citizenship
f. refusal of entry into the United Kingdom

Amend (2) in Article 10 from:

(2) No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This Article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police, of the fire and rescue service, of the ambulance service, people employed by or working for the National Health Service or of the administration of the State.

To:

(2) No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, or for the prevention of disorder or crime.
a. Nothing in this section shall prevent the expression of any opinion in any capacity that might be viewed as spreading or encouraging hatred against a person or a group of people.
b. Nothing in this section shall prevent the expression of anything that might:
i. upset another person
ii. cause another person to prematurely stop existing (worded this way to bypass the moderation filter preventing the S word meaning the same thing)
iii. cause another person to suffer from a mental health condition.
iv. is an opinion judged to be not worthy of respect in a democratic society
c. the list in (b) is not exhaustive.
(3) This Article shall not prevent the imposition of restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police, of the fire and rescue service, of the ambulance service, people employed by or working for the National Health Service or of the administration of the State.

Add to Part 2 Article 2:

(2) Nothing in this article prevents restrictions on the education of aliens.

Extent, commencement and short title

(1) This Act extends to the whole of the United Kingdom.
(2) This Act comes into force one month after Royal Assent.
(3) This Act may be cited as the Human Right (Amendment) Act 2020

Notes

This bill amends the Human Rights Act 1998. The changes are:

1. Allowing torture to be conducted in presence of British authorities if conducted by an alien authority
2. Added protection to armed forces from being sued using public money
3. Restricted the right of aliens to have legal aid
4. Change the infamous section on a right to family life to stop it being abused by aliens seeks to stay in Britain illegally or used to to prevent their deportation
5. Expanded the scope of the article on freedom of expression to allow free speech if it offends, intimidates or hurts someone. In essence, free speech is acceptable and this precedes a future bill to abolish hate speech restrictions.
6. Removes the right of education for aliens.

Link to articles being amended:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1
0
Theloniouss
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#2
Report 7 months ago
#2
Why should illegal immigrants not have legal assistance? And why should we allow anyone to carry out torture?
0
Cabin19
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3
Report 7 months ago
#3
Jeez advocating torture
1
username2998742
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#4
Report 7 months ago
#4
Absolutely not
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report 7 months ago
#5
(Original post by Knortfoxx)
Why should illegal immigrants not have legal assistance? And why should we allow anyone to carry out torture?
They broke the law to enter. Taxpayers shouldn't be paying for their appeals to stay permanently.
2
Bailey14
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#6
Report 7 months ago
#6
No.
0
SnowMiku
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#7
Report 7 months ago
#7
If one is accused of a crime one gets legal assistance. Based on just that, I'm naying.
Not to mention the rest of the bill. Education for one is a human right. Borders shouldn't discriminate - there are rules, and there's treating fellow humans like they're not human.
0
Theloniouss
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 7 months ago
#8
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
They broke the law to enter. Taxpayers shouldn't be paying for their appeals to stay permanently.
Surely the legal assistance is used to determine whether or not their entry was illegal, though? Also, what about the torture?
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 7 months ago
#9
(Original post by Knortfoxx)
Surely the legal assistance is used to determine whether or not their entry was illegal, though? Also, what about the torture?
If their entry was legal they would have a visa and be on the system. They wouldn't be going through the courts

We wouldn't be torturing them. If the Americans torture someone for intel and we're aware of the torture should we use the intel if it'll save lives in Britain? Obviously we would. Should British officers leave the room when the Americans are torturing people? No! If we're going to use the intel we should be there analysing what is said. We might pick up on something that was the said that the Americans didn't.
0
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 7 months ago
#10
How many people does the Bill's author believe are remaining in the UK as a result of the matters this Bill seeks to amend? Say per year?
0
1st superstar
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#11
Report 7 months ago
#11
BIG NAY disagree with this bill
0
Vapordave
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#12
Report 7 months ago
#12
Even thought they are illegally in the country, these people are still human and deserve human rights; these transcend borders, regardless of immigration status. It is frankly deplorable that we should literally dehumanise people by advocating torture and denying the right to a fair trial. In respect to the amendment to Article 10, I don't think that it is acceptable to effectively condone the spread of hateful ideas in a 21st century Britain. Legalising this will encourage the spread of a culture that can destroy the lives of people who simply want to live in peace.
1
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#13
Report 7 months ago
#13
If you're having to amend a ban on torture to insert some 'buts' it's probably just as well that the term is ending...
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#14
Report 7 months ago
#14
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
If their entry was legal they would have a visa and be on the system. They wouldn't be going through the courts

We wouldn't be torturing them. If the Americans torture someone for intel and we're aware of the torture should we use the intel if it'll save lives in Britain? Obviously we would. Should British officers leave the room when the Americans are torturing people? No! If we're going to use the intel we should be there analysing what is said. We might pick up on something that was the said that the Americans didn't.
Ever heard of Windrush?
2
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#15
Report 7 months ago
#15
1. Allowing torture to be conducted in presence of British authorities if conducted by an alien authority
Absolutely not. We must be upholding standards, and we cannot allow the possibility that others can dirty their hands for us.

2. Added protection to armed forces from being sued using public money
If the armed forces has been negligent/has committed another such civil wrong then of course people need to be able to effectively seek reparation.

3. Restricted the right of aliens to have legal aid
You mean 'denying people access to legal assistance, which poses a problem with the rule of law'.

4. Change the infamous section on a right to family life to stop it being abused by aliens seeks to stay in Britain illegally or used to prevent their deportation
I don't agree that this should be changed.

5. Expanded the scope of the article on freedom of expression to allow free speech if it offends, intimidates or hurts someone. In essence, free speech is acceptable and this precedes a future bill to abolish hate speech restrictions.
Oh dear....

6. Removes the right of education for aliens.

There's no need for this.
1
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#16
Report 7 months ago
#16
(Original post by Aph)
Ever heard of Windrush?
PRSOM.
0
Jammy Duel
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#17
Report 7 months ago
#17
(Original post by Aph)
Ever heard of Windrush?
I didn't realise this was the 40s, 50s, and 60s with a lack of documentation as opposed to the 21st century where it's only a matter of time until you won't be able to go for a dump without there being some government paper trail
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#18
Report 7 months ago
#18
Mr Speaker, no justification has been given for this bill to be supported. I therefore encourage the house to oppose it until a convincing case is provided by the bill author in the notes for it to be supported.
0
Iñigo de Loyola
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#19
Report 7 months ago
#19
(Original post by SnowMiku)
If one is accused of a crime one gets legal assistance. Based on just that, I'm naying.
Not to mention the rest of the bill. Education for one is a human right. Borders shouldn't discriminate - there are rules, and there's treating fellow humans like they're not human.
So British taxpayers should pay to educate illegal immigrants who (by their very presence in Britain) have shown that they do not want to abide by British laws?

I strongly support this bill especislly the amendments to §10 - a free market must also include the free trade of ideas and I will vote Aye.
0
shadowdweller
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#20
Report 7 months ago
#20
A definite nay from me.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (627)
33.66%
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (784)
42.08%
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (368)
19.75%
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (84)
4.51%

Watched Threads

View All