scholarly journals Case Comment: Catt v the United Kingdom: A lesson for the UK and European Court of Human Rights?

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew White
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk

The Legal Protection of Believers and Beliefs in the United Kingdom

2007 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier García Oliva
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Legal Mechanism ◽  
Degree Of Overlap

The enactment of the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 is the most recent legal mechanism developed to protect believers, beliefs and religious feelings in the United Kingdom. Despite the recognition of a certain degree of overlap between the different categories, this article proposes a broad distinction between legal devices which protect believers and those which safeguard beliefs and religious feelings. The common law offence of blasphemy is analysed, taking into consideration the response of both the UK courts and the European Court of Human Rights. The endorsement of the English law of blasphemy by Strasbourg is particularly relevant. Furthermore, this paper focuses on different instruments that, throughout the last few decades, have been articulated to protect the faithful, such as the crimes of religiously aggravated offences and the offence of incitement to religious hatred.

United Kingdom

2021 ◽  
pp. 89-108
Author(s):  
Christian Leuprecht
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Intelligence Community ◽  
State Security ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Accountability System ◽  
European Court ◽  
Legal Challenges ◽  
The Uk

The United Kingdom’s intelligence accountability system reviews and oversees the Five Eyes’ oldest intelligence and security community. Her Majesty’s intelligence community illustrates the challenge of managing the tension between state security with human security: a cycle of reform driven in an attempt to (re)gain the trust of a sceptical UK public and in response to technological progression. Over the course of the last century, the UK and its intelligence and security agencies (ISAs) assisted other Five Eyes members in establishing their own ISAs, while its cycle of reform has had equally important ramifications for driving innovation in intelligence accountability across the Five Eyes community. Controversies have undermined the prospect for public trust on which the legitimacy of the UK’s intelligence community ultimately depends. Changes from the initial focus on general administrative and executive review and oversight were driven by domestic and transnational legal challenges. The European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights have had a notable impact on security and intelligence in the United Kingdom. The chapter reviews the member organizations of the UK’s intelligence community, the strategic environment that has informed intelligence and accountability in the UK, national security threats from the vantage point of the UK, and the UK’s intelligence accountability architecture: the Investigatory Powers Commissioner and Judicial Commissioners Office, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, the Intelligence and Security Committee composed of members of both Houses of Parliament, and the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation.

The Impact of Pan-European General Principles of Good Administration on United Kingdom Administrative Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 81-122
Author(s):  
Sarah Nason
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Founder Member ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

This chapter explores the impact of the pan-European principles of good administration on the legal system of the United Kingdom. The chapter reveals that whilst the European Convention on Human Rights, and the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, have deeply impacted on domestic administrative law, the same cannot be said regarding other sources of the pan-European general principles of good administration. Furthermore, the chapter claims that the UK, as a founder member of the Council of Europe (CoE), sees itself as continuing to provide a degree of critical oversight of the CoE’s system. There is both political and legal resistance to the idea that international norms, such as those developed by the CoE, could provide a template for elements of the domestic legal order. However, the chapter concludes that in a post-Brexit UK the pan-European general principles of good administration may well take on increased significance.

scholarly journals State access to encrypted data in the United Kingdom: The ‘transparent’ approach

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 223-244
Author(s):  
Bernard Keenan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Encrypted Data ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Police Agencies ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Domestic Law

This article foregrounds four key powers through which the UK intelligence and police agencies (broadly referred to hereafter as ‘law enforcement’) may access encrypted communications and data. It is structured as follows. First, a brief overview of the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence on communications surveillance contextualises the overarching normative framework that must be translated into domestic law. The four powers are then discussed, both in legal and practical terms. The first two powers operate covertly, without the knowledge of the target. The latter two operate coercively, allowing police to demand individuals unlock encrypted data on penalty of prosecution. The article argues that the overall effect is to weaken encryption systems globally.

scholarly journals THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS – UNIVERSALIST ASPIRATIONS OF PROTECTION IN THE MIDDLE OF THE EDGE OF OCCUPATION

2012 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-171
Author(s):  
Susan Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Considerable Importance ◽  
International Convention ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk

This current commentary considers the case of Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v the United Kingdom (a recent decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)) and the issues upon which it turns. It raises the question of whether an occupying force has an obligation to protect the human rights of those under occupation. The inherent tensions, conflicts, contradictions, and limits posed in and by such a question are obvious. The occupying force – the UK – in this case constituted itself as part of the Multi-National Force (MNF) and invaded Iraq in 2003. The invasion and occupation was subsequently held to be illegitimate. The question of whether Iraqi citizens have a right to protection under any International Convention or treaty or any human rights instrument is a question of considerable importance and was the question so considered, in the case of Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi, in the case of Al-Skeini, and whether British forces were so protected was considered in R (Smith) v Secretary of State for Defence, to which I shall refer later.

To Discriminate in Order to Fight Discrimination

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dolores Morondo Taramundi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
The Other ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Main Technique ◽  
Antidiscrimination Law ◽  
The One ◽  
Paradoxical Results ◽  
Conflicts Of Rights

This chapter analyses arguments regarding conflicts of rights in the field of antidiscrimination law, which is a troublesome and less studied area of the growing literature on conflicts of rights. Through discussion of Ladele and McFarlane v. The United Kingdom, a case before the European Court of Human Rights, the chapter examines how the construction of this kind of controversy in terms of ‘competing rights’ or ‘conflicts of rights’ seems to produce paradoxical results. Assessment of these apparent difficulties leads the discussion in two different directions. On the one hand, some troubles come to light regarding the use of the conflict of rights frame itself in the field of antidiscrimination law, particularly in relation to the main technique (‘balancing of rights’) to solve them. On the other hand, some serious consequences of the conflict of rights frame on the development of the antidiscrimination theory of the ECtHR are unearthed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document