Twitter arrests, religion and the law, and Article 8 applications

5 August 2012 by

Another gratuitous Olympics pic

Welcome back to the UK Human Rights Roundup, your weekly bulletin of human rights news. The full list of links can be found here. You can also find our table of human rights cases here and previous roundups here.

by Wessen Jazrawi

In the news

It has been a quiet week in the blogosphere which suggests that everyone else has been as glued to the Olympics as I have. This week has seen the arrest of a 17 year old following abusive tweets to Tom Daley and a case looking at the interesting question of whether a Jewish girl could be allowed to have herself baptised, as well as cases concerning Article 8 applications. This week also marks the start of Parliamentary recess and the end of the Trinity legal term. The next couple of months will be quiet as the courts and parliament take their summer breaks.

 

Contractual security vetting

David Hart QC considers on the UKHRB the implications of the recent judgment in R (on the application of A) v. Chief Constable of B Constabulary [2012] EWCA 2141 (Admin), 26 July 2012 which concerned the award of a subcontract which was subject to vetting by the police. The police refused to give the subcontractor clearance and refused to say why, stating that it was a contractual matter. For a thorough analysis of the case, including the extent of the public law duty of fairness owed by the police, see David Hart QC’s post here.

Jewish girl may be baptised

Also by David Hart QC is a post looking at the interesting case of A Mother v. A Father [2012] EW Misc 15 (CC), 11 May 2012, where a Jewish mother went to court to stop her child being baptised before the age of 16. The judge looked to the Children Act 1989 to determine what was in the best interests of the child and held that the baptism could go ahead, if that was what the child wished. For more detail, see here.

Twitter abuse and Tom Daley

In an article on the Guardian, Joshua Rozenberg considers the arrest of a 17 year-old boy following abusive messages he sent to Tom Daley via Twitter. He considers the arrest in the light of the recent judgment in the Paul Chambers case, which cleared him of sending a menacing communication, and notes that what Twitter users have to understand is that a tweet is not an email – it is a broadcast that can be seen by anyone.

Where to make an Article 8 application from

The UK Immigration Law Blog examines the recent case of Secretary of State for the Home Department v Hayat (Pakistan) [2012] EWCA Civ 1054 which turned on the case of Chikwamba (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] UKHL 40 and the question of whether those here unlawfully should go home and seek entry clearance, or whether they can stay and make an Article 8 application from here. A number of issues were taken into account, not least the extent of disruption to family or private life if they were sent back, of which children played an important part.

Law and Media roundup

For an excellent roundup of news in the media law world, see the Inforrm Blog’s post – it covers the Leveson inquiry, statements in open court and apologies, journalism and recent cases.

World War II obsession distorts human rights debate

Finally, in a post on the UKHRB, Rosalind English provides an analysis of an article by SOAS EU law expert Dr. Gunner Beck which looks at the problems created by British hostility to Germany since World War II. She addresses the fact that there is a tendency to denounce anyone who criticises modern human rights legislation as a “crypto-Nazi, a racist, and a divisive and dangerous right-winger”. A recommended read for those interested in what lies beneath human rights law and theory.

In the courts

Secretary of State for the Home Department v Hayat (Pakistan) [2012] EWCA Civ 1054. Court of Appeal considers proper application of Chikwamba in two linked appeals about when it is appropriate to send someone back to their home country to bring an Article 8 claim from there.

Sign up to free human rights updates by email, Facebook, Twitter or RSS

UKHRB posts

2 comments


  1. thelawcourt says:

    The Tom Daley Twitter affair was perhaps the most controversial. Freedom of expression is a virtue, abuse it and the consequences will be severe. For a respective sportsman to come out and personally criticize an individual going through a difficult time is simply not on. Twitter is a great platform since it allows people of various societal ranks to interact. It would be a shame to see anything happen to it.

  2. Simon Carne says:

    Your heading above “Jewish girl may be baptised” is correct. But the description beneath the heading is, at best, highly ambiguous. I refer to your sentence: “The judge looked to the Children Act 1989 to determine what was in the best interests of the child and held that the baptism should go ahead.” [My emphasis]

    The judge decided that the girls wishes should be respected, ie that she could be baptised, if she wanted it, not that she should be. It was the respecting of her wishes which he determined was in her best interests, not the baptism.

    I don’t wish to sound picky, but I think it would be unhelpful if people are given the impression that the court had decided to order the baptism of a Jewish child.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the UKHRB


This blog is run by 1 Crown Office Row barristers' chambers. Subscribe for free updates here. The blog's editorial team is:
Commissioning Editor: Jonathan Metzer
Editorial Team: Rosalind English
Angus McCullough QC David Hart QC
Martin Downs
Jim Duffy

Free email updates


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog for free and receive weekly notifications of new posts by email.

Subscribe

Categories


Tags


7/7 Bombings 9/11 A1P1 Aarhus Abortion Abu Qatada Abuse Access to justice adoption AI air pollution air travel ALBA Allergy Al Qaeda Amnesty International animal rights Animals anonymity Article 1 Protocol 1 Article 2 article 3 Article 4 article 5 Article 6 Article 8 Article 9 article 10 Article 11 article 13 Article 14 article 263 TFEU Artificial Intelligence Asbestos Assange assisted suicide asylum asylum seekers Australia autism badgers benefits Bill of Rights biotechnology blogging Bloody Sunday brexit Bribery British Waterways Board Catholic Church Catholicism Chagos Islanders Charter of Fundamental Rights child protection Children children's rights China christianity citizenship civil liberties campaigners civil partnerships climate change clinical negligence closed material procedure Coercion Commission on a Bill of Rights common law communications competition confidentiality consent conservation constitution contact order contempt of court Control orders Copyright coronavirus costs costs budgets Court of Protection crime criminal law Cybersecurity Damages data protection death penalty defamation DEFRA deportation deprivation of liberty derogations Detention Dignitas diplomacy disability disclosure Discrimination disease divorce DNA domestic violence duty of care ECHR ECtHR Education election Employment Environment Equality Act Equality Act 2010 Ethiopia EU EU Charter of Fundamental Rights EU costs EU law European Convention on Human Rights European Court of Human Rights European Court of Justice evidence extradition extraordinary rendition Facebook Family Fatal Accidents Fertility FGM Finance foreign criminals foreign office foreign policy France freedom of assembly Freedom of Expression freedom of information freedom of speech Gay marriage gay rights Gaza Gender genetics Germany Google Grenfell Gun Control Health HIV Housing HRLA human rights Human Rights Act human rights news Human Rights Watch Huntington's Disease immigration India Indonesia injunction Inquests insurance international law internet inuit Iran Iraq Ireland islam Israel Italy IVF ivory ban Japan joint enterprise judaism judicial review Judicial Review reform Julian Assange jury trial JUSTICE Justice and Security Bill Law Pod UK legal aid legal aid cuts Leveson Inquiry lgbtq liability Libel Liberty Libya lisbon treaty Lithuania local authorities marriage Media and Censorship mental capacity Mental Capacity Act Mental Health military Ministry of Justice modern slavery morocco murder music Muslim nationality national security naturism neuroscience NHS Northern Ireland nuclear challenges Obituary parental rights parliamentary expenses scandal patents Pensions Personal Injury physician assisted death Piracy Plagiarism planning planning system Poland Police Politics Pope press prison Prisoners prisoner votes Prisons privacy private nuisance private use Professional Discipline Property proportionality prosecution Protection of Freedoms Act Protection of Freedoms Bill Protest protest rights Protocol 15 Public/Private public access publication public authorities public inquiries public interest immunity quango quarantine Queen's Speech queer in the 21st century R (on the application of EH) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 2569 (Admin) Rabone and another v Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust [2012] UKSC 2 race relations Rachel Corrie Radicalisation rehabilitation Reith Lectures Religion resuscitation RightsInfo right to die right to family life right to life Right to Privacy right to swim riots Roma Romania Round Up Royals Russia saudi arabia Scotland secrecy secret justice Secret trials security services sexual offence Sikhism Smoking social media social workers South Africa Spain special advocates spending cuts Sports Standing starvation statelessness stem cells stop and search Strasbourg super injunctions Supreme Court Supreme Court of Canada surrogacy surveillance Syria Tax Taxi technology Terrorism terrorism act tort Torture travel treason treaty accession trial by jury TTIP Turkey Twitter UK Ukraine universal jurisdiction unlawful detention USA US Supreme Court vicarious liability Wales War Crimes Wars Welfare Western Sahara Whistleblowing Wikileaks wildlife wind farms WomenInLaw Worboys wrongful birth YearInReview Zimbabwe

Disclaimer


This blog is maintained for information purposes only. It is not intended to be a source of legal advice and must not be relied upon as such. Blog posts reflect the views and opinions of their individual authors, not of chambers as a whole.

Our privacy policy can be found on our ‘subscribe’ page or by clicking here.

%d bloggers like this: