UK Human Rights Blog surpasses two million hits

4 March 2013 by

Champagne ExplosionJust a quick note to say that yesterday, in the furore surrounding the Conservative Party potentially threatening to take the UK out of the European Court of Human Rights and Angela Patrick’s post on secret trials, the UK Human Rights Blog surpassed an all-time total of two million hits. 

The blog was launched on 31 March 2010 and is written by members of 1 Crown Office Row barristers’ Chambers. It is now attracting around 100,000 page views per month and has thousands of subscribers across email, Facebook and Twitter. If you haven’t already, you can subscribe for free by email, Twitter or Facebook – more details here.

I am glad that we crossed the threshold with the two posts mentioned above, as both are representative of the kind of features which I think epitomise the purpose of the Blog: to provide a clear, non-hysterical (we hope) and accessible view into the complex world of UK human rights law. I am proud of the influence the Blog now has in the debate, and I hope it is generally positive.

Thank you as always to my co-editors Rosalind English and Angus McCullough QC, as well as the fantastic and wide ranging group of authors, commenters and readers. As is traditional, below is the up to date list of our all time best read posts: 

UK Human Rights Blog All Time Top 20

1. Hunting, animals, and the evolving landscape of rights 15,198
2. Introduction to Human Rights 14,967
3. Analysis: Pet shock collar ban – barking, or a new era for rights? 10,806
4. Cat had nothing to do with failure to deport man 10,693
5. Freemen of the dangerous nonsense 9,253
6. Freemen on the Land are “parasites” peddling “pseudolegal nonsense”: Canadian judge fights back 7,765
7. Article 8 and a half – wider than thought, but will it work? 7,309
8. Twelve weeks in prison for sick jokes on Facebook? Really? 7,027
9. Do full body scanners breach the right to privacy? [updated x 2] 6,780
10. Why Stephen Lawrence killers were sentenced as juveniles and under old law 6,473
11. What would happen if the UK withdrew from the European Court of Human Rights? 6,232
12. About 5,903
13. DNA, home testing and fuzzy human rights 5,693
14. The sovereignty of parliament and property: this week’s human rights roundup 5,512
15. Exclusion of Islamic preacher Dr Zakir Naik was lawful, says High Court 5,418
16. No right for prisoner to wear Easter lily 5,356
17. Avoiding contempt of court: Tips for bloggers and tweeters 5,100
18.British Airways strike and human rights – the union strikes back 4,956
19. Beanstalks and golden eggs 4,699
20. New “loss of control” defence as murder law reforms take effect 4,521

5 comments


  1. Huw Sayer says:

    Reblogged this on Huw Sayer and commented:
    Excellent – glad to see more people are paying attention to these vitally important issues.

    Today I have emailed my MP protesting against proposals for Secret Courts, urging him not to support calls for the repeal of the Human Rights act, and calling on him to reject the Lords’ amendment to the Libel Reform bill in favour of the original version approved by the House of Commons.

    Following a suggestion from friendly twitter chap Richard Ellis, I have also emailed my local district and county councillors as follows (you can do the same – the more pressure points the better):

    I know that local councillors are not responsible for the actions of MPs and Lords. However, please may I ask you (as my local councillors) to put pressure on your party colleagues (present and former) in parliament, particularly those in government:
    a) to reject Ken Clarke’s illiberal proposals for unjust secret courts
    b) to listen to Dominic Grieves when it comes to reform of the Human Rights Act and to reject Chris Graylings apparent idea that we should repeal it outright
    c) to reject the latest Lord’s amendment to the Libel Reform bill (introducing Leveson by the back door without proper debate) and ensure the bill passes in the form originally approved by the House of Commons.

    I will be paying particular attention to all these issues.

    I am not sure what they will make of this letter but it is worth a try – if only to make the point that, if they want my vote they are going to have to adopt a more liberal attitude.

    Happy days

    @HuwSayer

  2. ObiterJ says:

    Congratulations and very appropriate at a time when the UK’s relationship with human rights a law is under intense pressure from an autocratic government. Keep up the good work.

  3. Raf Salkie says:

    You are a fantastic voice of reason and compassion in a time of increasing barbarism.  Keep up the good work. — Raphael

    ________________________________

  4. Matt Whayman says:

    The best legal journalism is now to be found on the net. Huge congrats for your commitment to unbiased comment and making the law more accessible.

  5. Greg Casey says:

    What good news it is to see so many people interested in the good and proper reporting and discussion of UK and European Human Rights law !

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


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 contact tracing 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 Facial Recognition 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 home office 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 nuisance 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 Professional Discipline Property proportionality prosecutions Protection of Freedoms Bill Protest Public/Private public access public authorities public inquiries quarantine Radicalisation rehabilitation Reith Lectures Religion RightsInfo right to die right to family life Right to Privacy right to swim riots Roma Romania Round Up Royals Russia saudi arabia Scotland secrecy secret justice Secret trials sexual offence shamima begum Sikhism Smoking social media social workers South Africa Spain special advocates Sports Standing starvation statelessness stem cells stop and search Strasbourg super injunctions Supreme Court Supreme Court of Canada surrogacy surveillance sweatshops Syria Tax technology Terrorism tort Torture travel treason treaty accession trial by jury TTIP Turkey Twitter UK Ukraine universal credit 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: