Felons' interests count heavier than that of their victims

[Schroeder]

@Respenus

The problem is that this court can overrule national laws. We have no way to control it. It can de facto dictate our laws and we can't do anything against it. Now we get forced to soften up national laws that guaranteed protection from dangerous felons and have to release these people into society again. All those who get the so called "Sicherungsverwahrung" (preventive detention) are known to be incurable and violent. It is very likely that they will murder and rape again. We are not talking about a court decision that causes financial trouble or inconvenience. We are talking about very dangerous people being let loose on society with the expected result being a few people turning up dead and/or raped.
There is a reason why this preventive detention was established and now some judge in a foreign country dictates us to stop it.
that's what pisses me off. The court is endangering all people in Germany and that is a crime in my opinion.

[Respenus]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

The problem is that this court can overrule national laws. We have no way to control it. It can de facto dictate our laws and we can't do anything against it. Now we get forced to soften up national laws that guaranteed protection from dangerous felons and have to release these people into society again. All those who get the so called "Sicherungsverwahrung" (preventive detention) are known to be incurable and violent. It is very likely that they will murder and rape again. We are not talking about a court decision that causes financial trouble or inconvenience. We are talking about very dangerous people being let loose on society with the expected result being a few people turning up dead and/or raped.
There is a reason why this preventive detention was established and now some judge in a foreign country dictates us to stop it.
that's what pisses me off. The court is endangering all people in Germany and that is a crime in my opinion.

And I conceded to that point in my posts, did I not? But after having read the article, the rights of these people were violated, whatever the considered positive effect on society. You cannot be put in something akin to a jail, without being convicted before a court of law according to a law which was in force at that moment. The retro-activity and the fact that these people were in jail without being convicted is the main problem for the ECHR. Should Germany pass a law, allowing individuals to be convicted and put into preventive detention when there is enough proof (beyond any reasonable doubt), than there wouldn't be a problem.

I need to return once more to my original point. Go check what sentences were passed by the ECHR, where Germany was found guilty and tell me, how many of those would you consider positive and how many negative, based on a rational opinion and not just anger at the fact there is a court above you. That's the whole idea, so that I can go to the court, to seek protection of my human rights, even when the state does not ensure them. I know that for Slovenia, the ECHR has done some wonderful things, particularly concerning the judicial process. The supranationality of the court was agreed even before there was any EU, or better, at the time of the creation of the ECSC, the fore-runner to the current EU, which again, has nothing to do with the CoE.

And again, the fact that you may not agree with a single judgement, does not mean, that he thousands that are hidden from view, yet which have immeasurably increased the protection of your human rights and increased your standard of living (the ECJ in this case, if I may be allowed the jump), are any less valid, or that the system only passes such laws. Systems can be problematic at times (or today, almost constantly), yet the angry young men attitude, attacking for attacking sake, without offering any real alternative or even considering the other side of the argument, is something we need to avoid, you we (me, you, Sky and others) wish to reform the current system. That's all I'm saying. Rational discussion and proof will ensure our victory, not yelling and pointing fingers at the specific things which nag us in a particular way (And the rights of those German's truly were infringed upon, I was shocked when I read the report).

Who do they think they are? Is Germany a sovereign state?

As a soveriegn state didn't Germany make this EU thing part of German law

Now we get forced to soften up national laws that guaranteed protection from dangerous felons and have to release these people into society again.

Are these not new laws that were introduced after the agreement to follow the EU courts laws.
As I said earlier the fault lies with the initial sentences by German judges in German courts under German law.

The British people (a good majority IMHO) still await a referendum as to whether we (the UK) should remain a member of the EU and your original post is a shining example as to why they're concerned.

The only issue the Brits have in this case is the questions about life=life ruling. Which will stand as many other EU countries have the same well established law. If by some strange quirk of circumstances that legal option should be overturned then there is still the minimum term which is open so there is nothing to stop a judge from giving 3 life terms with each of a minimum of 40 years to be served consecutive.
If by some miracle a nonce lasts those 120 years in prison then all it needs is a good doctor to section them all nice and legal for the rest of their natural.

[Schroeder]

@Respenus

Fair enough. You have a point there.
I'm just getting so tired of this whole EU thing.