Bringing a cat wouldn't help, as there's no reason why the cat could not go back with them. Far better to get a cat here.

I don't get the "right to a family life" issue, not in the context of deportation for serious crime, which if proven, would otherwise require a custodial sentence.
A custodial sentence, by its very nature, deprives a person of freedom and thereby deprives them of a family life.

Depends if being able to be visited by family and if their rights to visit the convict are covered by this clause.

I would say that depending on the interpretation of an individual judge the right to family life could be applied to any custodial sentence. Afterall, a parent couldn't read to their kids at night, attend family weddings, birthday parties, parents evenings etc. You could also argue that having a curfew or tag prevents you attending family events in the evening e.g. a wedding reception, taking kids to the cinema etc.

I would say that you have to put the safety of the rest of society e.g. our human right not to be raped or murdered in front of those of the indvidual.

Clearly you can't. Or no one would be in prison. That doesn't mean deporting someone could not be considered to impact on their family life.



What has that got to do it? No one is saying let rapists and murders off Scott free.

What I was trying to get across is that the right to a family life is a very wishy-washy definition that depending on different people's interpretation could cover a wide variety of situations. The term "family life" needs defining better e.g. I could argue not being able to say goodnight and read a bedtime story to my kids was affecting my bonding with them, and hence my family life, if I was imprisoned, though I'm pretty sure if it went to court that I would lose.

If we can ban some foreign citizens from entering the country due to them posing a potential security/law and order risk, although they haven't as yet committed a crime in this country, then surely we should be able to deport foreign nationals who have actually committed serious crimes here.

We also seem to be rather good at preventing an overseas national that has legitimately married a British national from enjoying a family life by refusing them a visa or residency. I don't see the sense in not allowing law abiding spouses in to the country but allowing violent criminals to stay.

The suspension of that right is one of the punishments for committing the crime.