Start A Petition

Defective Military Equipment 'Is a Breach of Human Rights'

US Politics & Gov't  (tags: war, U.K., usa, Iraq, Afghanistan, defective military equipment )

- 3691 days ago -
U.K.: The Government suffered a landmark legal defeat yesterday when a High Court judge ruled that sending soldiers to war with defective equipment could be a breach of their human rights. (Why don't U.S. military troops have human rights?)

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Joycey B (750)
Saturday April 12, 2008, 3:09 pm
Noted. Thanks Mark.

Blacktiger P (247)
Sunday April 13, 2008, 4:19 pm
Noted, I'd be very surprised that this judge holds his seat! He goes against the grain and he will be replaced by a more amiable to Gov's wishes.

Nick K (3)
Sunday April 13, 2008, 5:02 pm
Then what does one call invading a sovereign nation and plunging it into a civil war? If this is a violation of the soldiers' human rights, what is the killing of thousands upon thousands of civilians?

Past Member (0)
Sunday April 13, 2008, 5:16 pm

A business.

Elisa M (93)
Sunday April 13, 2008, 7:00 pm

A big YAY!!,to Judge Collins

Peace Monger (185)
Monday April 14, 2008, 1:52 am
The legal system in the UK is different than the US.

Since medieval times, judges have prided themselves on being INDEPENDENT of the Crown. Under the British system,judges can never challenge the legality of laws passed by Parliament, but they do interpret legislation and if a law contravenes human rights, judges can declare it incompatible. The law then can be changed.

Judges in Britain are appointed by a Govt. minister, the Lord Chancellor, from nominations put forward by existing judges. The names proposed are those of senior lawyers who are believed to have the ability and judgement to do the job.
/British legal lesson, compliments of the Life in the UK Test. (feel ready to take the test?);)

This landmark ruling is being celebrated by those families who feel the military did not do enough to protect their loved ones; whether thru ignorance (ignoring the possibility of heat stroke in soldiers coming from a cold clime to a hot one) or, through the the absence of proper equipment.
Also, the use of outside coroner reports is HUGE! Those families who believe their loved one died due to defective equipment or serious failure to protect their loved ones from climatic changes will be able to address the MoD with their grievances.
This judgement apparently is saying the military has the responsibility to protect all soldiers under their control from injury/death outside of the bounds of normal conflict.
Obviously it would be better if this sort of judgement wasn't required, however, it's reassuring that the High Court is taking the side of the people in demanding the MoD assure all soldiers are equipped and educated to the very highest degree, otherwise the MoD is guilty of human rights abuse.
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.