Manchester UK - There is strong and open disagreement within Conservative Party in the UK, part of the ruling Conservative-LibDem coalition, over implementing of the Human Rights Act, with the pro-LTTE Tamils among Conservatives working against Home Secretary Theresa May who has announced plans to make major amendments to the Act.

The differences emerged at the Conservative Party Conference now on at Manchester, when Home Secretary May announced that immigration rules are to be amended to curb the ability of foreign nationals in the UK who are convicted of criminal offences resisting deportation by invoking their right to family life under the Human Rights Act.

Home Secretary May’s move against provisions of the Human Rights Act and even the suggestion of repealing it has broad support across the Conservative Party, as seem by the huge ovation she received when she announced the need to amend clauses or even do away with the Act.

There was an open clash within the Conference and in the media, between Home Secretary Theresa May and Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke over May’s observations at the Conference proposals against provisions in the Human Rights Act, that enable foreigners convicted of crimes in the UK to be deported by using its provisions on “Family Life”.

Pro-LTTE Tamil activists within the Conservative Party who are at the Conference, and those involved in fringe events at the Conference have mounted a campaign to oppose Theresa’s May’s move against these provisions in the Human Rights Act.

Home Secretary May’s position is that secondary legislation should be introduced to make clear that foreign nationals can be deported when they:

• Are convicted of a criminal offence
• Have breached immigration rules
• Have established a family in Britain while living in the country
   illegally; and
• Have to rely on benefits to house their family

There is growing opinion among Conservatives here that the UK policy on Human Right should not be constrained by the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke is strongly in favour of adhering to the provisions of the ECHR, as is the Liberal Democrat partner of the ruling coalition.

The media coverage of the Conservative Conference and Home Secretary May’s proposals to curb abuse of provisions of the Human Rights Act, focused on her illustration of such abuse with the case of a pet cat.

May illustrated the problems with the Act by giving examples of several notorious cases highlighted in the rightwing press. One such example was of an illegal immigrant who cannot be deported because he had a pet cat, and his deportation, keeping the cat with his living-in partner would affect his right to “Family Life”.

Theresa May told the Conservative Conference: "We all know the stories about the Human Rights Act. The violent drug dealer who cannot be sent home because his daughter – for whom he pays no maintenance – lives here. The robber who cannot be removed because he has a girlfriend.

The illegal immigrant who cannot be deported because – and I am not making this up – he had a pet cat."

She said that was why she was announcing the change in the immigration rules to "ensure that the misinterpretation of article eight of the European Convention on Human Rights – the right to family life – no longer prevents the deportation of people who shouldn't be here".

50 Deported to Sri Lanka

Meanwhile, pro-LTTE Tamil groups last week failed in their moves to halt the deporting to Sri Lanka of a planeload of 50 Tamils who were failed asylum seekers in the UK.

They pressured organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and Freedom from Torture to protest to the UK Border Agency that these deportees will be at risk of being detained and tortured on arrival in Sri Lanka.

Although these NGOs said they have credible evidence that torture is still talking place in Sri Lanka, and that anyone suspected of being linked to the LTTE is particularly at risk, they produced no evidence to establish these claims.

A UK Border Agency spokesman was quoted in the Guardian stating that: “We only undertake returns to Sri Lanka when we are satisfied the individual has no international protection needs. The European court of human rights has ruled that not all Tamil asylum seekers require protection.”