“To me – and I am trying very hard not to load my pro-European views onto this – the English version of the law, from a child’s point of view, is appreciably weaker under Children Act 1989 s 1(3)(a). A child’s ‘wishes and feelings’ are but one of six factors to be considered by the court. None of the six are to be given priority. In EU law the child has a right – unconditionally – to have his or her views taken into account (if that is what the child wants).”
Critical post deftly exposing the gaps which will be left behind in children’s rights infrastructure after #Brexit happens. However, Labour is proposing tabling an amendment on Tuesday to the withdrawal bill, aimed at retaining the charter as part of UK law. Let’s see what happens.
On a different note, what of the GAL who defies instructions and replaces the child’s voice with his own then passes that off as the ascertainable wishes and feelings of a child? Where is the remedy for the child and his parents for such festering sores blighting the public family law landscape? Perjury? Appeal?
A child’s Charter rights which will be lost
The Observer today reported that clause 5(4) in the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill which proposes to abolish Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) will create a substantial ‘human rights deficit’. It will leave ‘many different groups in society without adequate protection’. Clause 5(4) is in brutally clear terms: ‘(4) The Charter of Fundamental Rights is not part of domestic law on or after exit day’. This article concentrates on children’s rights under the Charter which will go on exit day.
An important means of protecting rights – apart from those rights already enshrined in a variety of other legislation and in the common law – is European Convention 1950. This is incorporated, most of it, into English law by Human Rights Act 1998. However there are two substantial qualifications to the importance of European Convention 1950, which the…
View original post 1,495 more words