Minister promises that Part III is coming

[Peter Mitchell]

Caspar Bowden wrote:

>>admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk] On Behalf Of Owen Lewis
>>>[mailto:ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk]On Behalf Of Caspar
> Bowden
>>Won't fly for me. But then you address a person who does not believe at
> all
>>in the conceit of 'human rights'. 
> 
> What do you mean by that? A fortiori, do you believe there are some
> circumstances when it is acceptable for a state to impose inhuman or
> degrading treatment or punishment?

It's possible to construct an ethical and legal system without rights. 
For example, you can base it instead on the concepts of duties and 
interdictions.

This model has the merit of avoiding absurdities like the so-called 
"right to life". How can there be a right to life when any one of us can 
drop dead tomorrow morning? "Aaargh ... my aortic aneurysm has ruptured 
... it isn't fair ... my fundamental human rights have been breached!" 
But if you write the intended moral principle as "Everyone has a duty 
not to kill anybody else" it makes more sense. It's also a bit closer to 
the way that criminal law is actually written, at least in England.

Under the duties model, the ethical principle you quote above would be 
stated as "Agents of the state have a duty not to impose degrading 
treatment on any person". The one relating to RIPA and child molesters 
would be, "A court has a duty to assume the innocence of an accused 
person until compelling evidence of guilt is shown, or until it is shown 
that the accused has a previous conviction for child molesting."

-- 
Pete Mitchell