Report comment

It is in the nature of Convention (human) rights that, notwithstanding the language in which they are expressed, they dwell in the "thou shalt not" area of the law. In other words, they prevent the state from impinging on the basic rights of the individual, without (save in the case of public education) the state (thee and me) being required to bankroll said "rights".

Now, I know it's good for some of our businesses. And there is a practical case for public funding of defence costs in some criminal cases because it saves massive amounts of costs and court time in the long run. But, honestly, what possible justification can there be for a "human right" to the tax payer footing the bill for everybody's legal costs?