DNA Database Breach of rights

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by oldbaldy, Dec 4, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. oldbaldy

    oldbaldy LE Moderator Good Egg (charities)
    1. Battlefield Tours

  2. Good call those judges.

    Now if we can just do something about the rest of the 1984 society.
     
  3. Seems the EU ain't that bad after all.
     
  4. European Court of Human Rights, comes under the Council of Europe. (and I agree)
     
  5. oldbaldy

    oldbaldy LE Moderator Good Egg (charities)
    1. Battlefield Tours

    Still one in the eye for the plod & control freaks though Hackle.
    Interesting that the Law Lords said it was not a breach of the HR law but the European Court disagreed.
     
  6. Good! Now let's congratulate the judges before Part-Time-Pongo decides in his ultimate wisdom that human rights are an unworthy issue for a military forum and bins this thread too.
     
  7. Good news from Europe, I didn't think I would see the day!
     
  8. Will this government abide by the court judgement? Do they have to? Will they ignore this edict? Will they change the law or bring in a new one vis-a-vis retention of personal data that has to be challenged through the whole judicial process again?
    The control freaks will not like it.
     
  9. Our government only accepts European Law that suits it.
    Hence the removal of the right to silence.
     
  10. Spliffy Smiff has already said she will ignore the judgement until they have had time to consider it - so that could take some time and some sort of expensive challenge or tinkering with laws to get round judgement should be expected.

    Did anyone expect a swift grovelling apology for treating millions of people as if they were criminals?

    It is a dreadful state of affairs when a democratic country like ours sets up laws that even the European Courts think are draconian and unfair.
     
  11. But even if they change the law will it still not be illegal?

    I thought that ECHR applied to all of us in its entirety not that you can cherry pick the bits you like.

    Nice to know that Ms Smith is looking for a way to get round it though.
     
  12. You would have thought so wouldn't you? But no, HMG reserves the right to ignore the European Convention on Human Rights. The prime use of this in the past has simply been to enforce Gatso usage, thats how they get around forcing you to admit to the crime of speeding in spite of it being illegal under Eoropean Law to force a confesion.
    They did manage to get the Law Lords to issue a ruling that admitting to driving a vehicle wasn't the same as admitting you were speeding but prior to that HMG simply stated that when it comes to Human Rights British Law takes precedence over European.
    Don't expect reason or justice from the shower of shite that govern us
     
  13. If this does change anything and those not convicted can request their DNA is taken off the Data base, as I'm sure they won't do it as a matter of course, how can you 'prove' that it has been removed? If they want it on there and you request it removed, what's to stop them just saying that they have, while keeping it on a second 'emergency' data base?

    Tin foil hat? Me?
     
  14. One of its better decisions. I'll bet Jacqui Smith was 'disappointed'. These commy b&stards wanted all of us on it, whether you were a criminal or not. Blair openly said that it was one of his aims.

    Don't be led by this 'if you haven't done anything you've nothing to worry about' sh*te that gets churned out either.

    For those who promote that played out clap-trap (usually after a high profile murder), can they provide the figures showing how many crimes the NDNAD actually solved last year, the year before an in every year since it was started, against the actual crime figures for England & Wales? That doesn't include crimes where the suspect was already known and could have been convicted on other evidence anway.

    This decision may have been reached by a European Court, but it is one which has promoted our beliefs that this is a free country, despite the efforts of this Government to turn it into a dictatorship. I wonder if they'll remove the 117,000 samples belonging to kids which shouldn't be there either or whether they'll just keep schtum about it?