Today Liberty responded to both the press and politicians’ proposals for press regulation, criticising the Royal Charter mechanism chosen by both for implementation - a vehicle more closely tied to Government than any Act of Parliament. A Royal Charter is constitutionally inappropriate, undemocratic, opaque and in no way fit for this purpose.
Today Liberty responded with dismay as plans for double punishment of the vulnerable via immigration and ASBO changes were included in this year’s Queen’s Speech – but welcomed the dropping of the dreaded “Snoopers’ Charter”.
Today Liberty announced it will seek Judicial Review of the Government’s controversial new “bedroom tax” policy based on the impact on separated families with shared custody of children. The announcement comes days before the High Court is due to rule whether a challenge based on the effect on disabled people should be allowed to proceed.
Today the Court of Appeal ruled that “nothing could justify” the way in which seven Metropolitan Police officers heavily restrained a severely autistic and epileptic child – known as “ZH” – while he visited a local swimming pool.
Today Amnesty International, JUSTICE, Liberty and Reprieve warned that the threat of Secret Courts is graver than ever after Ministers defied the House of Lords and reverted back to the original version of the highly damaging Justice and Security Bill.
Today the Court of Appeal ruled that the automatic disclosure of all convictions and cautions on CRB checks, regardless of their relevance to the job in question, is disproportionate – and therefore incompatible with the right to private life under article 8 of the Human Rights Act. The judgment was due to be handed down on 21 December 2012, but in an unusual move the Court delayed making it public because the Government raised concerns about the implications of the judgment for the CRB system.
Today the Court of Appeal revealed it has concluded the system of criminal records checks, which requires automatic disclosure of all convictions and cautions to certain employers, regardless of their relevance to the job in question, is incompatible with Article 8 of the Human Rights Act – the right to a private and family life. It circulated a draft judgment to that effect in December in the case of ‘T’, but the Court’s conclusion had not been revealed publicly until today.