17,122
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The human rights provisions of the Convention have now been brought into domestic law by the [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/contents Human Rights Act 1998], so violations of human rights law could be litigated in the domestic courts of the UK. A certain part Certain parts of the Convention seems applicable to the non-therapeutic circumcision of minor boys;:
→Legal matters: Revise subsection.
The United Kingdom has long been a member of the [https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal Council of Europe] and therefore subject to the [https://rm.coe.int/1680a2353d European Convention on Human Rights]. Under that Convention the United Kingdom may be sued in the [https://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=home&cEuropean Court of Human Rights] for alleged human rights violations.
* Article 3: Freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment
* Article 5: Everyone has a right to liberty and security of person.
The case of A v. United Kingdom (1998) involved the beating of a child with a garden cane. The court ruled:<blockquote> States required to take measures designed to ensure individuals not ill-treated in breach of Article 3 by other private individuals – children entitled to protection, through effective deterrence, against such treatment.<ref>{{REFdocument |title=A. v United Kingdom. [1998] 2 FLR 959 |url=http://www.cirp.org/library/legal/A_v_UK1998/ |contribution= |last= |first= |publisher=Circumcision Reference Library |format= |date=1998 |accessdate=2021-09-07}}</ref></blockquote>Nevertheless, no known cases have applied international human rights law specifically to the practice of non-therapeutic child circumcision in the UK.
The human rights provisions of the Convention have now been brought into domestic law by the [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/contents Human Rights Act 1998], so violations of human rights law could be litigated in the domestic courts of the UK.
{{REF}}
[[Category:UK]]