Minorities in the UK Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Minorities in the UK - Essay ExampleHowever, there are several factors which seem incomplete in the overall submit on the part of the local anaesthetics. The first one is that the identity of C is known which does not violate the same point in the Act. In this vein, 187B of the 1990 Town and unpolished Planning Act Part 3 states Rules of court may provide for such an injunction to be issued against a person whose identity is unknown.1 This is why the local authority made a huge mis pick out at imposing an illegal breach of planning toward the identified person in keeping stringently with the law. On the other hand, the fact that C bought that piece of land is more than just weighty. She must get through a host of different decision maker bodies to make it her reclusive property. Thus, if the local authority disregards the fact of purchasing land, then it disregards and sincerely blames the work of officials responsible for selling land to C. All in all, it is a provoking point addressed to the overall executive branch of power. It also does harm to the democratic freedoms proclaimed and shared by the British government. As a result, it is a serious violation of the law. Regardless of the fact that C is of Roma decent, she is an owner. By and large, there is a universal norm on justifying the gist of private property and rights of individuals, namely Property rights is an index of the degree to which the government enforces laws that protect private property.2 Thus, the eviction is not permissible. To say more, the case is all about well-nigh discriminatory nature nurtured highly on the part of the local authority. C wants to station her caravans in order to provide her children with suffice healthcare and education which is in spite of appearance easy reach. This is the next hallmark of the discussion. Once again, here is the fact of straight-forward discrimination toward Roma people in the UK. In this respect the High Court should take it into account since it would be a blame for EU and the UK, in particular. Equality in rights is needed to keep the social equilibrium. However, it is a case for EU, as the British government lobbied on issues concerned with equal access to education, employment and housing for Roma people.3 This is why the case of C should be considered in terms of supranational commission on the human rights and the right for housing, in particular. What is more, the fact that C could buy the piece of the land in the London Green Belt makes it accomplishable to suppose that she has a host of other rights. According to the ECSR and the Committee on Human Rights in Europe, the right to housing permits the exercise of many other rights civilized and political as well as economic, social and cultural rights.4 Hereby, C is eligible in taking her part while solving the issue of stationing her caravans upright the local school and healthcare facilities. Roma people and other indigenous ethnical groups living in th e UK are also protected by the OSCE conventions on their sustainable integration.5 Hence, it is another standpoint to think of by the High Court while considering the merits of the case. Along with the undeniable fact of purchasing and owning the land, C is allowed to share the simplicity of the amenities as declared by the Council of Europes Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities which the UK belongs to.6 Thus, the UK government cannot disregard a set of obligations found on the international