The UK politicos and right wing end of the press in the UK (I don't think they have another end) have been having a right moan lately about the European Court of Human Rights. The Sun newspaper reported on 8th July "BRITAIN may have to leave the European Court of Human Rights to stop another Abu Qatada shambles, David Cameron and Theresa May declared last night."
Am I the only one thinking that the abolition of corporal punishment in UK schools owed a lot to pressure from that court and several cases that the UK government lost in that court over the issue? So if we were to come out... I don't imagine for one moment there would be a headlong rush to repeal the ban, but maybe a few years down the line, some relaxation allowing some private schools to have a limited reintroduction??? Almost enough to make me vote conservative (but not quite).
6 comments:
Ah, if only. Sorry to go all politics (hey, you started it ;) ) but none of the mainstream parties has any intention of doing much about the ECHR or the EU or the UN or any other such body. The noises they make about them are just mood music.
Okay, silly hat back on!
Oh James if only. It is not that all their rulings are daft (though a lot are) it is the fact that this outside body dictates to a sovereign power but then other EU countries also smart under it. Why do we all put up with it. However, would we really want CP back in our schools? Not every teacher was using it for legitimate reasons at least in my day they weren't and the best teacher rarely if ever did. Old Tom
The problem is that the Court focuses entirely on the rights of the complainant and appears to take no account of the behaviour of the complainant him/herself.
The question the Court should be required to ask before even entertaining a claim is this. 'Has this claimant infringed the rights of another person in such a fashion that, had the infringement been committed by a State or a State-sponsored body, that infringement would have amounted to a breach of that other person's Human Rights. This would be just and 'equitable'.
'Equity' is a hallowed tradition of our legal system. Centuries ago, English Chancery Courts developed the principle that a man - it was always a man in those days - should not be allowed to exercise his strict legal rights if it could be shown that he had acted 'unconscionably'.
It was said that 'he who comes before Equity must come with clean hands'. Perhaps if the European Court practised 'Equity' then cases such as these would be a thing of the past.
That was very well said Targetarer I felt it but couldn't articulate it.
Old Tom
Parents would be in favour of a reintroduction of corporal punishment if it either contributed to an improvement in academic achievement (parents fight tooth and nail for places for their children at the 'best' schools, as defined by academic achievement) or to a reduction in bullying and general thuggery prevalent in some, but by no means all, schools.
A recent survey (I don't have a link but it was reported in the Telegraph and elsewhere) found that 20% of teachers would back a reintroduction.
At my school in the late 70s and early 80s caning was rare, but it kept us all in line because we knew the unpleasant consequences of any serious misdemeanour. If someone was caned it had a salutary effect on us all. Only one girl was caned in my time(for shoplifting) but it caused a frisson of excitement throughout the school.
So parents and teachers are in favour but the Europeans stand in the way.
The 20% of teachers in favour was all the more surprising given that CP was finally banned in the 1980s and had already been banned by many local authorities before that. Given the huge number of teachers who left the profession early in the 80s and 90s and all those retired since then the steady 20% is highly significant. Old Tom
Post a Comment