Uk Law I.E. Acts Of Parliament example essay topic

Specific Restrictions on Freedom of Speech and statement Defamation If a statement is made that makes false statements that would harm a person's reputation, then they can be liable - LIBEL Censorship no censorship of plays but the Theatre Act 1968 makes it a criminal offence to present a play which is likely to corrupt / deprave any individual local authorities will decide whether a film is suitable for public viewing. They also have the responsibility of granting licenses for premises to show films. They can also rely on the BBFC Anyone may start an action in respect of an alleged obscenity in a film National Security People who have acquired knowledge which if made public would the safety of the state are forbidden by the Official Secrets Act from disclosing this information. They are subject to prosecution if such information is disclosed the mass media are also liable for prosecution if they publish information breaking the Act Obscene Publications It is an offence to publish any obscene material which is likely to deprave / corrupt people, like in the Protection of Children Act 1978 or the Children and Young Persons Act 1955 Freedom of Association The Public Order Act 1936 (sec. 2) prohibits semi-military organisations; it is an offence to control, manage, organise or train anyone for the purpose of taking the place of the police, armed forces etc, or for the use of force in promoting politics e.g. Spearhead 1963; neo nazis were convicted under this Act The Prevention of Terrorism Act 1984 Part 1: illegal organisations including the IRA and Irish National Liberation Army; it is illegal to belong to such organisations or to solicit or invite financial support There are very few restrictions under English law; you can join almost any club or religion that you want, with the exceptions of above Freedom of Assembly The Public Order Act 1936 (sec.

11, 12, 13) Section 11 an advance of 6 days must be given under section 11 to the police if it is a procession intended to demonstrate support for / opposition to views or actions of any groups or persons it is an offence if you do not do this, or if the procession differs from the indicated notice (notice is needed for the police to organise road route etc) sometimes the police dont use all of their powers e.g. the fuel crisis 2000/Pinochet demonstration; this cannot stop spontaneous gatherings Section 12 senior police officer can change the route or meeting place if the demonstration: may result in public disorder e.g. damage to property may result in serious injury OR if the purpose was organising for intimidation Note; re-routing sometimes undermines the whole point of the march Also, there is too broad a description of the Act; all marches intend disruption of some kind - it is the whole point of having them if section 12 can't be used e.g. outside factory and can't be used elsewhere then... Section 13 Chief officer of police can apply to the council to ban the procession for not more than 3 months, but to do so must have the consent of the Home Secretary this happens very rarely and is taken very seriously due to limitations of liberties / freedoms and rights if it is a political march, the Home Secretary may have a conflict of interests Section 11 - 13 conclusion Police are left to make their own minds up over actions -sometimes pointless in restrictions e.g. fuel crisis as spontaneous marches can happen Raves; (outdoor festivals) -Can be stopped if not licensed -criminal offence if you refuse to leave the site of the even -police can arrest someone they believe to be going to one within a 5 mile radius This seems to give too much power to the police, but stops people in the first place therefore making it easier to control Hunts; 1994; new offence of 'aggravated trespass' introduced which made it a criminal offence if intending to disrupt a legal activity i.e. foxhunting Freedom from Discrimination Disability Discrimination Act This act states that service providers must: Make sure access to their services is not impossible or difficult e.g. by installing lifts provide an alternative means of service where physical barriers make access difficult e.g. providing a member of staff to help visually impaired people around a shop provide an aid or service to help a disabled person to use their service e.g. printing bank statements in braille These all have to be reasonable, i.e. the service provider should ensure that reasonable steps are taken to meet the criteria e.g. if you cannot install lifts because the building is listed then fair enough Parliament can pass legislation that ensures nobody is discriminated against e.g. the Race Relations Act, sex and in the future it looks like disability. At the moment though, there are no laws against age discrimination Freedom of the Person and Privacy PACE (Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984) protection against police abuse of power areas where freedom of person / privacy may be infringed (+evidence) Protection against police abuse of power PACE section 2: officers who want to carry out a search must give their name, police station and the purpose of the search plain clothes officers must provide written evidence that they are police PACE section 3: an officer must make a written record of the search immediately after, or ASAP if this is not practical (you can ask to see the statement up to 12 months after the search). if it is not practical, then the officer is relieved of this requirement e.g. at a football match no record is necessary if the officer had only stopped the person and not searched them Areas where freedom of person / privacy may be infringed PACE section 1: an officer may stop any person / vehicle in a public place if they have reasonable grounds to suspect that the person / vehicle possess stolen goods or other prohibited items e.g. drugs, offensive weapons etc or if they suspect the person has committed / is about to commit t an offence It is the interpretation of reasonable grounds that can be done unfairly i.e. privacy infringed: young people are 11 x more likely to be stopped than older people men 2 x as likely as women Afro-Caribbeans more likely than whites Judicial Review The case is reviewed i.e. checked by a judge in the High Court. This is used when a public body or individual has acted ultra virus (beyond it's power), or has failed to act Examples Pinochet Amnesty International challenged Home Secretary's decision to return Pinochet to Chile as procedure he'd followed was not fair e.g. they hadn't disclosed all of Pinochet's medical records Michael Howard (old home secretary) tried to increase Bulger killers's entente to 15 years; this was considered illegal Judicial review therefore acts as a safeguard from people in high power positions acting unfairly European Court on Human Rights (ECHR) This enforces the European Convention on human rights Up until the Human Rights Act, it couldn't be enforced in UK courts, so you would have had to go to Strausbourg to have your case heard Example: Malone vs. UK (1984) Facts: -had phone 'tapped' and said that this was a breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights: the right to privacy; unless it is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security... or the prevention of crime -there was no law in the UK to prevent it being tapped, so he went to the European Court Held: this was illegal, so the UK introduced the Interception of Communications Act 1985 as a result Cases that have gone to the ECHR Corporal Punishment: Boy took parents to court over beating. In England, corporal punishment is allowed to the extent of 'reasonable chastisement'. Therefore, the boy went to the ECHR, where it was in breach of Article 3.

The UK law is now being revised. Gays in the forces ECHR ruled in 1999 that the sacking of 4 service personnel due to them being gay was a 'breach of their privacy rights' i.e. Section 8, therefore gays are now allowed in the forces Transexuals not permitted to change their birth certificate post-op and not to recognise a marriage between a tran sexual and a person of the same gender Evaluation Must first go through all of the UK courts before you could go to the ECHR in Strausbourg, as the Convention was not part of UK law. Now it is though, and came into effect in October 2000 as the UK Bill of Rights BILL OF RIGHTS The government passed a Human Rights Act to incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law e. g: everyone has the right to life (Article 2) no one shall be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Article 3) everyone has the right of privacy for his private and family life, his home and his correspondance (Article 8) What if there is a conflict between UK Law and the European Convention? e.g. Article 10 - freedom of statement Article 11 - freedom of assembly / association should it be left to unelected judges to decide, or should parliament have the final say? Human Rights Act provides a compromise: Judges apply UK LAW i.e. Acts of Parliament so individual who brought the case must still go to the ECHR in Strausbourg BUT Judges can declare UK law is in conflict with the convention and Parliament will change the law in a 'FAST TRACK' procedure Conclusion Parliament retain the power over the law i.e. they have the final say once the law is changed, all UK citizens IN THE FUTURE will be protected, so the individual may want to go to Strausbourg or wait until the law is changed.