UNIVERSAL DECLARATION 

 

OF HUMAN RIGHTS

 

HOME  |   CASE STUDIES   |   HISTORY   LAW   |    POLITICS       RIGHTS    SITE INDEX

 

 

 


Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948

 

 

Article 11.

    (1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

     

    (2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

     

UK CASE IN POINT UNDER REVIEW

 

In the case of Nelson Kruschandl Vs the United Kingdom (Sussex Police and Wealden District Council) he with a series of alleged sexual offences in 2006 under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. A trial took place in February of 2008.

 

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 provides that a person accused of a sexual offence is presumed to be guilty rather than innocent at the outset, contrary to Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

 

The 2003 statute was enacted by the British Government under the guidance of David Blunkett, a Member of Parliament and the then Home Secretary. Mr Blunkett's agenda was to increase the number of convictions regarding sexual offences - also to increase sentences to the point where thousands of Indeterminate Public Protection (IPP) prisoners are being detained many times over their tariff. The 2003 Act is truly is an abomination of a legal document that is blind to the consequences of the eugenics approach to bending of the rules of law to, in-effect, massage the convictions statistics to make himself and his Labour Government under Tony Blair more popular to win votes.

 

David Blunkett (now Lord) must have known that the reversal of the duty imposed on him by Article 11, would have required additional funds for any half decent defence to be mounted, but there was no increase in Legal Aid funding for those accused of sexual charges.

 

In addition the word went out to Single Judges that only a very few appeals would be allowed with a similar direction to the Criminal Cases Review Commission.

 

 

 

 

OTHER CASE DEFICIENCIES

 

Sussex Police failed to secure the crime scene  ..... To be continued ....

(other language versions)

 

The Human Rights Act 1998  -  Schedule 1 Part I - The Articles  -  Part II  First Protocol  -  Part III Sixth Protocol

Scotland Legislation |  Wales Legislation |  Northern Ireland Legislation |  HMSO