MARY POPPINS

The Nights Mary Poppins Died

The Nights Mary Poppins Died

How do Charles Mandox's views on liberty and right differ from most modern understanding or interpretation of human rights under the European Convention of Human Rights and the Human Rights Act?

Charles Mandox's view on liberty is purely suuportive. Charles likes liberty himself, and believe liberty should be given to every individual. Charles wants to live life freely, he knows his rights, and knows how to practice his rights. He is familiar about the individual rights of others and respect them thoroughly. Charles himself is very liberal, and he loves to live life freely. Charles wants to use all his rights, which he considered is his personal right. He is not conservative, instead he is really broad minded. His thoughts and views are dofferent from modern human rights, as he thinks if someone is doing something good, someone have to pay cost for it as well. As in the incident Zero Mining, he don't have any regrets, he is quite sure that there is not a single mistake made by company. Although equipments were old, and staff is untrained, still he jutifies that everything is just an accident. Company took all safety measures, still this incident happened. So Charles views were different different from human rights act, who ensure that every employee should be provided with full safety at workplace. So Charles is a liberal, but having different point of view from human right acts.

The Human Rights Act (HRA) is obviously a work illustrative of British genius. It sets up a mechanism to adapt British law the law of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), both comparable to a "Chinese ceremonial" and a "carpet beggar." To an observer Continental, the HRA consists largely in a legal curiosity. In any case, the United Kingdom legislature has striven to do original work, since it has not felt the need to follow the proven paradigms applied by other countries 'common law' in the field of protection of basic rights. The HRA is a very special Act of Parliament, since de facto it is coated with a supra-legislative value that makes it virtually irreversible. From a political point of view, a back, that is to say, the repeal of the HRA seems hardly conceivable. Indeed, this text is part of a constitutional dynamic: in many ways, it is even the highlight of the constitutional reforms initiated by the Blair government (Janis 2003, pp. 18-28).

The legal questioning of the HRA would have serious consequences especially difficult to accept rebels in a rapid absorption. The protection of fundamental rights in Britain would fall to a double standard, as would have been on whether or not the application of the HRA. For two years, the HRA has attracted an impressive number of comments: This text has become a sort of "best seller" not only because of its intrinsic importance but also because of the multiplicity of angles that it offers, especially constitutional, and more of them ...