A senior British judge has accused the European Court of Human Rights of going beyond its jurisdiction and trying to create a "federal law of Europe".
BBC NEWS Lord Hoffmann, the second most senior Law Lord, said the Strasbourg court had imposed "uniform rules" on states.
The judge said rulings that had gone against domestic decisions were "teaching grandmothers to suck eggs".
He said he supported the European Convention on Human Rights but not the institution that applies the law.
In a lecture to fellow judges, published this week, Lord Hoffmann said the European Court in Strasbourg had been unable to resist the temptation to "aggrandise its jurisdiction" by laying down a "federal law of Europe".
The court should not be allowed to intervene in the detail of domestic law, he said.
Lord Hoffmann - who is due to retire - added that this had led to the court being "overwhelmed" by a growing backlog of 100,000 cases.
The court's president, Jean-Paul Costa, said earlier this year there was a risk of "saturation" unless measures were agreed to reduce the caseload.
The European Court of Human Rights aims to apply and to protect the civil and political rights of the continent's citizens.
The court, set up in 1959 in the French city of Strasbourg, considers cases brought by individuals, organisations and states against the countries bound by the European Convention on Human Rights, which are all European nations except Belarus.
Lord Hoffmann, should retire now, the European Court of Human Rights is a necessity, because of the draconian and slipshod way our “justice” system “works” without the European Human rights Court we would have no chance of challenging the government and certain institutions that deny us our rights.
Mind you the “institution that applies the law” does need looking at.
"We don't know who we are until we see what we can do." Martha grimes
Angus
Angus Dei on all and sundry
NHS Behind the headlines
NHS-THE OTHER SIDE
BBC NEWS Lord Hoffmann, the second most senior Law Lord, said the Strasbourg court had imposed "uniform rules" on states.
The judge said rulings that had gone against domestic decisions were "teaching grandmothers to suck eggs".
He said he supported the European Convention on Human Rights but not the institution that applies the law.
In a lecture to fellow judges, published this week, Lord Hoffmann said the European Court in Strasbourg had been unable to resist the temptation to "aggrandise its jurisdiction" by laying down a "federal law of Europe".
The court should not be allowed to intervene in the detail of domestic law, he said.
Lord Hoffmann - who is due to retire - added that this had led to the court being "overwhelmed" by a growing backlog of 100,000 cases.
The court's president, Jean-Paul Costa, said earlier this year there was a risk of "saturation" unless measures were agreed to reduce the caseload.
The European Court of Human Rights aims to apply and to protect the civil and political rights of the continent's citizens.
The court, set up in 1959 in the French city of Strasbourg, considers cases brought by individuals, organisations and states against the countries bound by the European Convention on Human Rights, which are all European nations except Belarus.
Lord Hoffmann, should retire now, the European Court of Human Rights is a necessity, because of the draconian and slipshod way our “justice” system “works” without the European Human rights Court we would have no chance of challenging the government and certain institutions that deny us our rights.
Mind you the “institution that applies the law” does need looking at.
"We don't know who we are until we see what we can do." Martha grimes
Angus
Angus Dei on all and sundry
NHS Behind the headlines
NHS-THE OTHER SIDE
No comments:
Post a Comment