| Display title | Jonathan Sumption, 'Judgment call: the case for leaving the ECHR' (Spectator, 30/9/23) |
| Default sort key | Jonathan Sumption, 'Judgment call: the case for leaving the ECHR' (Spectator, 30/9/23) |
| Page length (in bytes) | 1,323 |
| Page ID | 15311 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
| Counted as a content page | Yes |
| Edit | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
| Move | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
| Page creator | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 21:14, 1 October 2023 |
| Latest editor | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 21:14, 1 October 2023 |
| Total number of edits | 1 |
| Total number of distinct authors | 1 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 90 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | Lord Sumption takes issue not with the text of the European Convention of Human Rights, which was agreed upon by the member states, but with the European Court of Human Rights - in particular, its "living instrument" doctrine through which he says it has "emancipated itself from the text and allowed itself to wander freely over the whole realm of social policy" and made law in a manner which lacks democratic legitimacy. He cites examples relating to territorial jurisdiction, binding interim orders, Article 8, and qualified convention rights. He concludes that the convention should be replaced with a domestic code of basic rights which would look very like it, and that our own courts, with their long tradition of defending fundamental rights and holding governments to account, can be trusted to enforce human rights. (Avoid paying by using the Archive link.) |