‘Killer Robots’ and ‘Conversion Therapies’ – The Human Rights Round-up

14 April 2015 by

A scene from the 2003 film Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines

This week’s Round-up is brought to you by Alex Wessely.

In the news:
Military chiefs have criticised the influence of Human Rights law in a report published this week, arguing that the “need to arrest and detain enemy combatants in a conflict zone should not be expected to comply with peace-time standards”. This follows a series of cases over the years which found the Ministry of Defence liable for human rights violations abroad, culminating in allegations of unlawful killing in the Al-Sweady Inquiry that were judged “wholly without foundation” in December.

Killer Robots”: In other military news, Human Rights Watch argues in a report that there is a “dangerous gap” in legal accountability for “Killer Robots” – fully autonomous weapons which possibly represent the future of conflict. HRW calls on these weapons to be banned under international law, as “a fully autonomous weapon could commit acts that would rise to the level of war crimes if a person carried them out, but victims would see no one punished for these crimes”.

The ‘privacy versus security’ debate has also been in the news. Tom Jackson asks whether African governments can successfully tackle cybercrime while still preserving their citizens’ human rights. Meanwhile, Amnesty International are taking the UK to the European Court of Human Rights over the government’s “indiscriminate” mass surveillance practices.

Other news:

  • Keeping up the fight: Law Society President Andrew Caplen commends the Society’s “relentless lobbying”, but warns that more work is needed after the general election on the issue of court fee increases.
  • America: President Obama has called for an end to ‘conversion therapies’ for LGBT youths. The controversial therapies aim to “repair” young gay, lesbian and transgender Americans into changing their sexual orientation.
  • Malaysia: the UN warns that anti-terror and sedition laws “curtail human rights”.

In the courts:

The applicant, who was convicted of murder in 2004, has an IQ of 62 which places him in the bottom 1% of the population, and an understanding of English equivalent to a six year-old. In his original trial the judge allowed the jury to draw adverse inferences from his refusal to give evidence in his defence. This week, the European Court of Human Rights ruled this was not a violation of Article 6 (right to a fair trial). There was such strong circumstantial evidence linking him to the crime (such as a bloody knife and clothing found at his home), that the conviction was not solely based on his refusal to testify.

Cestaro was protesting the G8 summit in 2001. While sitting with his back to a wall and arms raised, Italian police beat him with batons causing multiple and permanent injuries. The ECHR ruled this amounted to torture under Article 3, and also criticised Italy’s criminal justice system for failing to bring the perpetrators to account.

The applicant is a divorced Iraqi woman and member of a minority Gnostic religious group, appealing a deportation order as she had previously suffered threats in Iraq.  The European Court rejected the appeal, as the situation had been resolved under Swedish law, but emphasised  that single women who are members of ethnic or religious minorities are at risk of ill-treatment in Southern and Central Iraq. The case is analysed here and here.

Other:

  • RightsInfo

RightsInfo – the new project set up by this Blog’s very own Adam Wagner, will be launched on Tuesday 21st April. An update on the project can be found here.

If you would like your event to be mentioned on the Blog, please email Jim Duffy at jim.duffy@1cor.com

1 comment;


  1. daveyone1 says:

    Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..

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 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 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 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 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 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: