Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

McKerr v. the United Kingdom

McKerr v. the United Kingdom 206 11 hrcd [ 2000 ] review proceedings concerning the Coroner’s refusal to give the family prior access to witness statements and his grant of anonymity to RUC witnesses. The inquest proceedings have still not been concluded. On 7 December 1992 , the applicant had instituted civil proceedings, alleging death by wrongful act. These are at the discovery stage. The applicant complains, among other things, that his son was killed by an excessive use of force contrary to Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. He also complains under Article 2 that there has been no prosecution in relation to the unjustified killing and that there has been a failure to comply with the procedural requirement under Article 2 to provide an effective investigation into the circumstances of his son’s death. He submits in particular that the inquest proceedings are flawed due to the limited scope of the enquiry, the lack of legal aid for relatives; the lack of advance disclosure to the family of inquest statements and the lack of compellability as a witness of the police officer who fired the shots. The applicant also complains under Article 6 that his son was deprived of http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Human Rights Case Digest Brill

McKerr v. the United Kingdom

Human Rights Case Digest , Volume 11 (3-4): 205 – Jan 1, 2000
Download PDF
2 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/mckerr-v-the-united-kingdom-83qjp0RsBu

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2000 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0965-934X
eISSN
1571-8131
DOI
10.1163/15718130020617611
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

206 11 hrcd [ 2000 ] review proceedings concerning the Coroner’s refusal to give the family prior access to witness statements and his grant of anonymity to RUC witnesses. The inquest proceedings have still not been concluded. On 7 December 1992 , the applicant had instituted civil proceedings, alleging death by wrongful act. These are at the discovery stage. The applicant complains, among other things, that his son was killed by an excessive use of force contrary to Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. He also complains under Article 2 that there has been no prosecution in relation to the unjustified killing and that there has been a failure to comply with the procedural requirement under Article 2 to provide an effective investigation into the circumstances of his son’s death. He submits in particular that the inquest proceedings are flawed due to the limited scope of the enquiry, the lack of legal aid for relatives; the lack of advance disclosure to the family of inquest statements and the lack of compellability as a witness of the police officer who fired the shots. The applicant also complains under Article 6 that his son was deprived of

Journal

Human Rights Case Digest – Brill

Published: Jan 1, 2000

There are no references for this article.