To take one possible argument
Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides:
"1. Everyone has the right of freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others …..
2. No restriction shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others …."
Isn’t it obvious that a rule making gatherings of more than 6 people criminally unlawful involves an interference with the right to freedom of assembly and association within the meaning of Article 11(1)? It restricts the ability of people to assemble and associate other than in small groups. So for example, it affects the freedom to gather to protest.
If so, the real issue is whether those restrictions are justified under Article 11(2) of the Convention. Yes, they pursue a legitimate aim as they are intended to inhibit the spread of infection; yes, they are in accordance with law as they were imposed by regulations made pursuant to an Act of Parliament. The question is whether they are a proportionate interference.
I would have thought at least arguably not - there is no immediate prospect of the NHS being overwhelmed (on the contrary); it has become clear that for large parts of society the virus is reasonably harmless; since the outset we have developed a number of reasonable treatments for those who do become ill; the mortality rate is much lower than was thought initially; we may or may not at some unknown future time develop a vaccine (i.e. there is not definite end point – is this to be an annual event?). People are not being compelled to gather together.
If this restriction is lawful, then what else? How many people die each year as a result of obesity or alcohol consumption, or car crashes, or seasonable flu for that matter? Should we criminalise behaviours associated with those deaths? And why limit the restriction to 6? Why not 4? Why allow for any social interaction at all?
I do find a bit odd the reaction that this is all completely alright, and people should just shrug their shoulders and accept it. It is at least worth careful examination.
Posted By: paulg on September 9th 2020 at 14:09:24
Message Thread
- Bit tricky to see how football attendance (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 10:44:24
- 6 fans per stand. Maximum attendance per match: 24 (n/m) (NCFC) - essexcanaryOTBC, Sep 9, 14:16:47
- please dont confuse Human Rights (NCFC) - ghostof barry butler, Sep 9, 12:18:08
- ^ this (n/m) (NCFC) - megson, Sep 9, 13:35:48
- Yeah, this (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Sep 9, 12:51:18
- To take one possible argument (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 14:09:24
- "Isn’t it obvious.." (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Sep 9, 15:39:09
- Well, without wishing to be too technical (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 16:25:33
- Firstly, it's a judicial review... (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Sep 9, 16:49:17
- So I take it (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 18:32:47
- None of your business (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Sep 9, 19:15:37
- Hardly shambolic (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 19:35:01
- genuine apology (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Sep 9, 20:10:28
- Thanks - but to contextualise (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 21:33:37
- Nice (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Sep 9, 21:42:11
- Time well spent 🤔 (n/m) (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 21:50:34
- Nice (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Sep 9, 21:42:11
- He’s offended by the inconvenience (NCFC) - SCC 28, Sep 9, 21:09:45
- Thanks - but to contextualise (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 21:33:37
- genuine apology (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Sep 9, 20:10:28
- Hardly shambolic (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 19:35:01
- None of your business (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Sep 9, 19:15:37
- So I take it (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 18:32:47
- Firstly, it's a judicial review... (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Sep 9, 16:49:17
- Well, without wishing to be too technical (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 16:25:33
- I agree - curtailing of liberty should always be thoroughly questioned (NCFC) - Mecagoenti, Sep 9, 14:36:43
- "Isn’t it obvious.." (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Sep 9, 15:39:09
- To take one possible argument (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 14:09:24
- Human Rights (NCFC) - inutero, Sep 9, 11:26:36
- that's a particularly shit straw man argument (n/m) (NCFC) - CWC, Sep 9, 11:34:12
- Not even an argument (NCFC) - inutero, Sep 9, 11:37:02
- more people have died of covid in the UK than were killed in the blitz (NCFC) - jampersands, Sep 9, 13:36:39
- They wouldn't have given a fuck .They had abit of resilience (n/m) (NCFC) - protheroe fitzgibbon, Sep 9, 13:38:08
- oh that old chestnut (NCFC) - CWC, Sep 9, 11:55:11
- Imagine how they’d have behaved during rationing (NCFC) - SCC 28, Sep 9, 11:50:16
- well ... (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 12:05:45
- But not being allowed to meet up in groups over 6 (NCFC) - SCC 28, Sep 9, 12:12:00
- its not "mass death" ffs (n/m) (NCFC) - CWC, Sep 9, 20:35:58
- the right have decided this isn't a public health crisis, or that there's any risk of (NCFC) - jampersands, Sep 9, 13:34:53
- Piers Corbyn is right wing? (n/m) (NCFC) - protheroe fitzgibbon, Sep 9, 13:36:33
- But not being allowed to meet up in groups over 6 (NCFC) - SCC 28, Sep 9, 12:12:00
- well ... (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 12:05:45
- more people have died of covid in the UK than were killed in the blitz (NCFC) - jampersands, Sep 9, 13:36:39
- Not even an argument (NCFC) - inutero, Sep 9, 11:37:02
- that's a particularly shit straw man argument (n/m) (NCFC) - CWC, Sep 9, 11:34:12
- Why would they be in breach of human rights? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Sep 9, 10:51:13
- Because (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 11:06:32
- Why would it not be proportionate? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Sep 9, 11:49:20
- Maybe he goes group dogging (n/m) (NCFC) - jamesward, Sep 9, 12:22:26
- 6 is plenty (n/m) (NCFC) - essexcanaryOTBC, Sep 9, 14:17:20
- Lovely little spot in bacton FWIW... (n/m) (NCFC) - protheroe fitzgibbon, Sep 9, 12:59:44
- really .. where .... asking for friend off course (n/m) (NCFC) - ghostof barry butler, Sep 9, 13:48:34
- Maybe he goes group dogging (n/m) (NCFC) - jamesward, Sep 9, 12:22:26
- Why would it not be proportionate? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Sep 9, 11:49:20
- because going to footy is an inalienable human right (NCFC) - Tombs, Sep 9, 11:00:49
- Why would I go there? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Sep 9, 11:01:55
- Fair enough but don't think you'll find the solution on here tbf (NCFC) - Tombs, Sep 9, 11:12:36
- Well it’s a forum yes (NCFC) - SCC 28, Sep 9, 12:02:07
- yes, shared and ignored (NCFC) - Tombs, Sep 9, 12:12:06
- You just pretend to ignore the views 👏🏼 (n/m) (NCFC) - essexcanaryOTBC, Sep 9, 14:18:02
- Fuck off troll (NCFC) - Tombs, Sep 9, 14:40:58
- You just pretend to ignore the views 👏🏼 (n/m) (NCFC) - essexcanaryOTBC, Sep 9, 14:18:02
- yes, shared and ignored (NCFC) - Tombs, Sep 9, 12:12:06
- Well it’s a forum yes (NCFC) - SCC 28, Sep 9, 12:02:07
- Fair enough but don't think you'll find the solution on here tbf (NCFC) - Tombs, Sep 9, 11:12:36
- Why would I go there? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Sep 9, 11:01:55
- Because (NCFC) - paulg, Sep 9, 11:06:32
Reply to Message
In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.
If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.