Proceeding contribution from Andrew Dismore (Labour) in the House of Commons on Friday, 2 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill.
Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. As I was saying, unless there were a permitted derogation, a Government or country who wished to withdraw from those provisions would either have to leave the Council of Europe, or be thrown out of it. The Joint Committee on Human Rights scrutinised the Bill of the hon. Member for North Thanet in its 23rd report of Session 2003–04. It said:"““This Bill would remove the deterrent effect of the criminal law in relation to murder, manslaughter and assault, amongst other offences . . . In removing the deterrent of the criminal law in this way, the Bill would in our view breach positive obligations to protect Convention rights to life and physical integrity. We consider that the Bill would be unlikely to be capable of interpretation””—"
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 440 c574
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Crime prevention Crimes against the person Crimes of violence Criminal law Buildings Burglary Criminal liability Firearms Protection Police Prosecutions Property Victims Trespass Self-defence
- Legislation
- Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 12:17:55 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283309
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283309
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283309