1/ In 1962, the UK Supreme Court (Shaw v DPP) used its competency to create new law (new crime): “conspiracy to corrupt public morals”.
Judge Simonds declared the objective “to enforce the supreme and fundamental purpose of the law”.
The crime #SilverRule
The judge #GoldenRule
2/ In the decision, by the #GoldenRule, the judges take initiative & bypass the Parliament to enforce principles (of #SilverRule) even against the shifting “popular will” (coercive power of Supreme Court based on golden principles retained for 100s of years).
3/ The European Court of Human Rights tries to mimic the spirit of legal universalism (Golden Rule) by giving arbitrary & conflicting interpretations on novel & vague principles (“human rights”). European Justice is coercive Iron Law with Golden ambitions.
4/ What is “freedom of expression” in art 10 of ECHR? Well, you are free to insult Jesus, but not Prophet Muhammad. The mental gymnastics you can do with any given UnGolden Rule of the Convention for Human Rights, has surprised even the bold ones who tried this out in the courts.
5/ Most europeans have no clue about the ambiguity that the Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) brings to the national courts & hijack national laws. The most bizarre interpretations of “human Rights” makes experts surprised. Example:
6/ Given that:
1. European & Inter/nal Justice is extremely centralised applied through decentralisation (local courts apply central dogma)
2. Their facade seems invincible (human rights) It appears political localism (local administration) is the objective. Not the solution.
7/ “The margin of Appreciation” shows the opportunistic nature of “Human Rights”: French classrooms can’t have christian symbols (e.g. cross), while Italian classrooms can. Human Rights à la carte? They don’t enforce fundamental principles but a BS doctrine. They know it.