Neither does it say that anyone has a right to be given money because "they don't want to work"

I'm not a lawyer, but I believe those are the parts that pertains to this issue.

If a shop lifter steals £100 of goods from Sainsbury's, they are criminally liable for the theft, possibly resulting in prison. They might receive an extra punishment from the supermarket itself in the form of a ban. If they are an alcoholic, with a history of stealing wines and spirits, the court might even issue some kind of order forbidding them from entering off licenses and all supermarket wine sections.

None of this would breach their human rights as the punishment would be proportionate to the crime, and no agency would be exceeding its powers.

If a benefits cheat steals £10,000, they are criminally liable for the theft, possibly resulting in prison.

The DWP though cannot ban him from its services. If Sainsbury's ban the alco shoplifter, they are not making it impossible for him to buy food, he has other shops to hand for that. If the DWP refuses to serve the man, they are saying: in the future this man has a choice between being a smelly tramp, or being a thief again. If we're going to do that, then we may as well ban him from the NHS as well; in case of heat attack, do not resuscitate, he doesn't deserve it.

The trial judge wouldn't be able to enforce such a punishment in the first place as it breaches UK law, being quite clearly cruel and unusual. So it is only if the DWP applied the punishment under its own authority that a European court would ever see the matter.

+1

The DWP may be able to - they are not the operational arm of the department - Jobcentre Plus is, and they can ban people from their premises. Banned people have to go the other offices elsewhere in town.

There is precedent. 20 year old knowledge (may be horrendously out of date): If you have savings over the limit allowed by Income Support and claim, you will not be allowed to receive any benefit until your savings dwindle under that limit. If you suddenly dispose of those savings, you could be deemed to have disposed of them in order to receive benefit (circumstances are taking into account - you needed to have a bloody good reason though), and you will be teated as if you still had them, effectively banning you from getting any benefits. This happened occasionally, but wasn’t an every day occurrence.

They will also be incredibly unfair. I can see the benefit of being able to collect any sums back through pay and benefits until repaid. Though what could reduce these events happening in future is easier access to short term credit through credit unions or social fund loans, which can be repaid through benefits. At the moment, you apply for a loan and it can be turned down or reduced. But if the person has no outstanding social fund loans then why? If people could have up to £500 available through a social fund loan then they may not have to break the law to get emergency funds. So rather than these people being driven into the arms of loan sharks to pay for Christmas they apply for a social fund loan to pay for Christmas and repay it back over the next year.

However once the claimant is deemed to be in genuine need, rather than to have simply taken out their savings and stuck them in a biscuit tin, then they qualify for the help they need. What makes the plan in this topic so stupid is that it positively demands that the criminal returns to crime.Punishment for a crime committed is supposed to focus the criminal's mind on the benefits of reforming his naughty ways.

I've no problem with sending people to prison for the crime of theft if they have systematically plundered the exchequer. Likewise, the proceeds of the crime should be forfeit, and I'm happy for the sentence to be increased if they fail to inform on their co-conspirators or if they hide the assets acquired with illegally obtained funds. Those are proper punishments for crime. But when they stumble out of prison, they need somewhere to live, and an income of some sort, or they will die. And we don't sentence people to starve or freeze to death in this country.