Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fw: [Slower Speeds UK] Human rights, round one

Expand Messages
  • Simon Baddeley
    x-post: This is good news indeed! S ... From: Paige Mitchell To: slower-speeds-uk Sent: Saturday,
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 29, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      x-post: This is good news indeed! S

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Paige Mitchell <info@...>
      To: slower-speeds-uk <slower-speeds-uk@...>
      Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2001 7:12 PM
      Subject: [Slower Speeds UK] Human rights, round one

      > This message comes to you from the Slower Speeds UK email list. Please see
      the end of this email for instructions on sending messages and
      > MORE Northamptonshire, a truly useful website. This is the most
      > informative piece I've seen on the Lords' ruling last year. It might
      > still come in handy.
      > paige
      > ----------
      > Human Rights is Not An Issue
      > The county's Safety Camera Project team have welcomed the official
      > news that an individual's Human Rights are not breached when a
      > driver identifies him or herself as an offending motorist in a
      > speeding incident.
      > Since the Human Rights Act became law in October 2000, a number of
      > motorists caught speeding in Northamptonshire have written or
      > phoned the Project to question whether their Human Rights are
      > affected when they incriminate themselves.
      > The multi-agency Safety Camera Project team, including
      > representatives from Northamptonshire Police, the County Council,
      > and Magistrates, have always been confident that what was being
      > asked for from drivers was legal. This is because Section 172 of
      > the Road Traffic Act 1988, which requests driver information, is
      > primary legislation, and notices requesting driver information are
      > legitimate investigative tools. They do not invite any admission
      > of substantive wrongdoing. Accordingly, Article 6 (2) and the
      > limited rule against self-incrimination are not violated.
      > On December 5 2000, the Privy Council sat in relation to a
      > Scottish drink-drive self-incrimination case. The five Law Lords
      > made a ruling in favour of upholding the offence against a
      > Margaret Anderson Brown. A unilateral decision by all five Lords
      > was taken to uphold that 'No breach in compulsory admission' had
      > occurred.
      > Superintendent Steve Chamberlain, from the Safety Camera Project,
      > said: "Although we were totally confident that what we were asking
      > for was legal, a number of motorists questioned it and we eagerly
      > anticipated the result of 'the Scottish case' to set a precedent.
      > "We welcome the decision of the Privy council which clearly
      > indicates that self-incrimination in relation to a driving
      > offence, be that drink-driving or speeding, is not in breach of
      > Human Rights.
      > "Our enforcement process is not in breach of motorists' Human
      > Rights and we hope drivers will now move away from this issue and
      > concentrate on the more important issue of slowing down and saving
      > lives."
      > To unsubscribe from the list please send an email to
      > To send messages to this list, address emails to
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.