§ 57. Mr. Gouldasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what rôle was undertaken by Her Majesty's Government in the recent hearing before the European Commission on Human Rights concerning the imposition of corporal punishment by Isle of Man courts.
§ Mr. Roy JenkinsThe European Convention on Human Rights extends to the Isle of Man, as it does to a number of other territories for whose international relations the United Kingdom is responsible, by reason of a declaration under Article 63 made by the United Kingdom Government. The declaration in respect of the Isle of Man was made after consultation with the Isle of Man Government. The United Kingdom Government also accepted, after consultation with the Isle of Man Government, on behalf of the Isle of Man, the competence of the European Commission to receive petitions from individuals in accordance with Article 25.
The petitioner to the European Commission in the case in question contended that birching is prohibited by Article 3 of the Convention, which provides that no one is to be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Corporal punishment as a judicial penalty has been abolished in the United Kingdom. The retention of the penalty 503W in the Isle of Man is thus contrary to the policy followed in this country and conflicts with the views of Her Majesty's Government. While, however, the Government are opposed to the penalty, and would not countenance its return in the United Kingdom, the criminal law and its administration in the Isle of Man are matters that by constitutional convention normally fall within the sole competence of the Legislature and Government of the Isle of Man. This explains why, although the United Kingdom Government hold the views that they do on judicial corporal punishment, the penalty nevertheless continues to be available for certain offences in the Isle of Man.
The position of the United Kingdom Government is, however, that it does not necessarily follow from their opposition to corporal punishment as a judicial penalty that such punishment constitutes a violation of the Convention, and that, as a matter of construction, the Convention does not in fact preclude all forms of judicial corporal punishment.
Since the Government of the United Kingdom, as the contracting party to the Convention, are internationally responsible for the observance of the provisions of the Convention, both in the United Kingdom itself and in the territories to which they have extended it under Article 63, the United Kingdom Government were necessarily the respondent to the proceedings before the Commission.
The Government were represented in the proceedings by counsel and by Her Majesty's Attorney-General for the Isle of Man, since he would be in a position to deal with policy and circumstances in the Isle of Man.