The International Bill of Human Rights.

To: UK Supreme Court & The Attorney General

The International Bill of Human Rights.
275
of 300 signatures
Marker-centered.png%7cshadow:false%7c55.378051%2c-3
Campaign created by John Wilson Icon-email


To The Supreme Court and the Attorney General.

Both parties need to issue a joint 'formal interpretation' of the significance of the International Bill of Human Rights, which consists of a number of Treaty documents agreed with the United Nations. Because the UK Government(s) have been acting in violation of it for decades. Even the Supreme Court itself and its predecessor the House of Lords, has ignored or misinterpreted its significance too.

So they must admit their own guilt of failing to act on this, by ensuring that Parliament had respected these rights in all of its UK laws. And also explain how they propose to put this right for any citizens whose rights have already been violated by any acts of the judiciary and from which date they consider it came into effect. Bearing in mind the documented opinions of the UN's Human Rights Committees and Human Rights Council/(formerly Commission), addressed to the UK and/or all UN Member States.

Why is this important?

Before reading what follows, I suggest you watch this short 10 min. video (especially the last few minutes) at http://www.humanrights.com/what-are-human-rights.html ,to learn what lies behind the reason for this campaign. Hopefully you'll then feel able to support it even if you don't understand the details, because your support is vital to its success:-

In the judgement by the Supreme Court on the 30th May 2012, in the Julian Assange extradition case, [2012] UKSC 22 {published as UKSC_2011_0264_ Judgement on their website} - Lord Phillips and others referred to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which was set out through the United Nations in 1969.

However, their comments seem to have been limited to Part III, Section 3 paragraphs. These only deal with the “Interpretation of  Treaties”, whereas the two foregoing sections 1 & 2 dealt with the “Observance and Application of Treaties”.

Will the Court therefore confirm, or deny, the significance of these parts of the Vienna Convention? And also state in detail how any UK Laws, including the secondary legislation known as the Civil Procedures Rules, have ever fully complied with the States ‘legally binding obligations’ to respect and give effect in its domestic legislation to all International Human Rights Treaties, including The International Bill of Human Rights.

The latter includes within it, the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which stated in its Article 10, that - “Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.”.

Although, the wording was changed in Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to - “All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.”.

The Civil Procedures Rules for England & Wales, since 1998 at least if not before, do not seem to have been compatible with either of these fundamental rights and principles.

Otherwise why would any Judge be allowed to issue any orders “without a hearing” or strike out any defences filed by any defendant, also without a guarantee of a ‘fair hearing’ beforehand?

Surely such ‘acts’ are a direct and clear violation of those rights and are, or should have been, prohibited by virtue of Article 30 of the Universal Declaration and Article 5 of the two International Covenants, which form the rest of the International Bill of Human Rights?

They must also therefore accept and admit that such acts, by any State bodies, are also a violation of Articles 26 and 27 of the Vienna Convention itself. Therefore logically the entire ‘English/UK legal process’, which can readily deny anyone in Civil Proceedings the absolute right to a ’fair and public hearing’ is flawed. Whereas it is everyone's inviolable and inalienable right, to have a full and equal hearing under all International Law.

They should also examine and confirm the compliance of such procedures throughout the whole of the UK with these absolute rights. Can the Supreme Court also provide statistics to back up any claims by it, that these assertions are unfounded, if that is their belief?

By stating how many Civil Court Judgements are issued by UK Courts, without a hearing year on year? If no such records exist, then how can they be sure that these basic rights have not been violated by the judiciary with impunity?

Moreover, how can the public be sure that they will get or have had a fair hearing, if a claim is, or has been made against them under such a fundamentally flawed and illegal process?

I would also refer them to UN General Comments No 13 from 1984  and No.32 from 2007 by the Human Rights Committee. The latter of which also stated that “Article 14 contains guarantees that States parties must respect, regardless of their legal traditions and their domestic law”, which must include Civil and/or Criminal Procedures or Rules in any part of the UK or its Overseas Territories.

This seems to tie in directly to Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, as the International Bill of Human Rights is undeniably such a Treaty. As, surely, are all other International Human Rights Instruments which have been issued by the United Nations and which the UK is party to and has ratified decades ago.

So the people of the United Kingdom need to know,what right does any Judge in any UK Court have to ignore those rights? Or to not be compelled to follow them to the letter in any ‘court of first instance’. It seems that they have, in fact, been doing so on a daily basis for decades now, in England and Wales at least, by using or abusing the Civil Procedure Rules of 1998.

How it will be delivered

Email them as I don't live in London, unless someone at 38 Degrees can volunteer to hand it in to the Supreme Court.
Flag this petition for review

Reasons for signing

  • kenrick g. 2014-03-08 15:45:06 +0000
    am sorry the Ministery of Justice is a Private Corporation and so is the Government. Which incidently are supposed to be Public Servants who is in breach of their public Duty. The truth however, they serve only Private Corporations by their deeds creating a conflict of intrest. The implication is clear. We are Ruled by Deception Fraud Coercion Force and Violence. We are not Free but Slaves by force. This needs to be clarifed. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
  • Sinead H. 2014-03-06 00:58:19 +0000
    A government should always be held accountable to its people, and how should be laid out clearly in law
  • david e. 2014-03-05 23:45:15 +0000
    the evil disgusting Theresa May wants to get rid of human rights.What is step 2?

Updates

16 days ago

Tonight (29/03/2014) I discovered this document published by the UN in 1994 http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/13c09e245cae8a47c12563e8004995bf?Opendocument.

You should note what they said in paragraph 8, and especially these words "Similarly, judges and other members of the legal profession have not given sufficient consideration to the importance of this Covenant within domestic law". But paragraph 14 is also relevant too.

This has been the State's attitude since 1945, when the UK became founding members of the UN, never mind 1976 when these two Covenants became "legally binding" on it.

So what more evidence do you need to see, to prove that UK Domestic Laws and Administrative Procedures, have not been compatible with Human Rights, and never will be unless you support this campaign?

Please vote for it now, if you haven't already done so and be sure to spread the word to everyone you know, in the UK.

about 7 hours ago

I appreciate the increase in the number of signatures lately, but I notice that most people seem to be missing the link below to the new one on the Avaaz.org website, which is intended for everyone to sign too.

Maybe if we don't, or can't get an answer form our own Government, then the UN will confirm the validity of everything which I've read off their website.

After all, they claim to be the true source of Human Rights since the Second World War ended in 1945. Yet we still seem to be living in world where money buys you 'rights'. And if you're not a multi-millionaire then you've got no chance of getting a decision out of the Supreme Court either.

Because you just can't afford their fees. Nor would you be told how to fill in their forms to 'satisfy' their bureaucratic procedures, which have no doubt been in place since the 12th Century too.

So 'thanks for all the signatures' but please don't forget the rest of the world, whilst we're at it.

3 months ago

Considering that all human rights are supposedly universal, then this issue should also be universal throughout the world. But as any admission from the United Kingdom (should one arise as a result of this campaign), wouldn't make a difference to the rest of the world, today I started another petition at http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/General_Assembly_of_The_United_Nations_Confirm_the_relevance_of_The_International_Bill_of_Human_Rights_to_all - which I would ask anyone seeing this one to also sign, and spread amongst your friends and family etc.

As this new one is addressed to The United Nations itself, then if I am right about this campaign for the UK, then hopefully the UN will have to answer it too for all of the world. The future needs to be in our hands, not theirs.

about 1 month ago

100 signatures reached

3 months ago

The death of Nelson Mandela 2 days ago, should remind us all of the need to fight for our rights, no matter how long it takes, and whatever the State chooses to do, to punish those who disagree with their 'illegal systems' until they give in and admit they're wrong. See the UN tribute at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Pages/WelcomePage.aspx

It's also just another 3 days from the 65th Anniversary of the date when the General Assembly sat down in Paris to agree the final wording of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which they 'proclaimed' as The International Bill of Human Rights.

So we need to ask our politicians to explain how long they expect to get away with ignoring the principles set down in The Declaration itself. You can do that by spreading the word about this petition.

4 months ago

50 signatures reached

4 months ago

Whilst the Government et al, will be 'celebrating' the sacrifices made by our Armed Forces since the ending of the First World War, on the 95th Anniversary of the Armistice on the 11th Nov 1918, they will no doubt be forgetting the 65th Anniversary of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights the following month.

So if you read this please ask your friends and family to support this campaign, which will hopefully jog their memories in due course. Even if they mention it they'll lie about respecting these rights and will continue to break their promises to create a better world which all those people died for.

If everyone in the UK could sign it then maybe they'd get the message that "Actions speak louder than words", and we all know that all their words are lies.

6 months ago

The problems in Syria are just another example of how UN Member States have been ignoring International Human Rights since 1948. Even the 5 Permanent Members of the UN Security Council, who's job it is to sort out these kind of violations (including the UK;China; France; Russia and the USA) can't even agree on what action to take and they're supposed to be the 'experts'.

Perhaps they should have reminded Syria about its obligations to the UN years ago, but they would no doubt point out that none of these Member States have ever complied fully with their own 'legally binding' obligations to the UN. So they might justifiably say that "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones".

See https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-International-Bill-of-Human-Rights/450680961697432 for other links to the UN's documents about this issue.

8 months ago

Human Rights violations aren't just about countries where people can be indiscriminately killed, such as is occurring in Lebanon. But are also about Economic, Social and Cultural Rights too, which the European Convention has resoundingly ignored. But the Council of Europe are not alone in ignoring these rights.

For another example see https://www.hrw.org/node/117300 where you will find that even the so called 'World Bank' has been at it and examples of what the words "interrelated and interdependent" in the UN's documents really mean.

We should not tolerate the UK's position that some rights are 'justiciable' whilst others aren't. We shouldn't tolerate a judiciary which back that notion up by issuing Court Orders without a hearing, which they've actually been doing for years.

comments powered by Disqus