The British Human Rights Act 1998 has regularly come under attack and criticism by right-wing newspapers, journalists and politicians who lambast its apparent feeble justice, costly litigation and political correctness.
Yet, despite the apocryphal portrait induced, the Human Rights Act seeks to protect everybody's human rights, especially the individual’s own personal rights.
The Human Rights Act
It was the British New Labour Party’s Manifesto in 1997 which promised to incorporate the rights enshrined by the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 into domestic law.
This was in response to the party’s ‘human rights consultation exercise’ in 1996. The British Conservative Party had always been against formal incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights, arguing that British people were already well protected.
Still, the Human Rights Act received Royal Assent on 9 November 1998. The Act applies to UK Public Bodies, which typically includes, central and local government, the court and criminal justice systems.
It further encorporates, public service providers, including, local councils, the National Health Service, government offices, the police, prison services as well as transport sectors.
The Human Rights Act 1998 further strengthened rights in two primary ways for UK citizens. This was mainly done by:
- Ensuring consistent legal interpretations,
- Obliging public authorities to comply by not contravening against any of the Articles set out in the European Convention on Human rights.
The Human Rights Act Protects Law-Abiding Citizens and Punishes Criminals
Human Rights laws do not give criminals the right to enjoy the same freedoms as law-abiding citizens. On the contrary, the Act insists that people convicted of crimes must be deprived of their liberty and not released early should they pose a danger to the public.
Furthermore, the Human Rights Act requires serious offences like murder, terrorism and rape to be fully investigated by the police (who can also be held responsible for gross failures) and justly prosecuted.
How Safe Are Citizens Under the Human Rights Act?
The Human Rights Act makes it mandatory that the state protects its citizens from serious crimes, in addition to encapsulating the essence of freedom.
This will include, the right to privacy and freedom of expression, as well as the right to be protected in public and nationally. The Act also recognizes with absoluteness the right against torture or inhumane treatment.
Under the Act, subjecting human beings to such inhumane treatment can never be justified. Criminals or terrorists who threaten national security can be deported; however, the Human Right Act forbids deportation where the person faces torture elsewhere.
The Financial Costs of the Human Rights Act
The White Paper 1997, entitled Rights Brought Home, states that, ‘it takes on average five years to get an action into the European Court of Human Rights once all domestic remedies have been exhausted; and it costs an average of 30,000. Bringing these rights home will mean that the British people will be able to argue for their rights in the British courts – without this inordinate delay and cost’.
The Human Rights Act has helped thousands of British people protect their basic human rights minus the excessive and costly court cases.
People’s rights can now be protected by UK courts, which is far more efficient and cost-effective.
Readers are also strongly encouraged to read:
Irene Khan: Human Rights: Book Review
The European Convention on Human Rights 1950
Sources:
Fenwick, H. (2007) Civil Liberties and Human Rights (London: Routledge-Cavendish).
Fenwick, H. and Phillipson, G. (2004) Text, Cases & Materials on Public Law & Human Rights, (Cavendish).
Geary, C. (2007) Civil Liberties (Oxford).
Hunt, M. (1997) Using Human Rights Law in the English Courts (Hart).
Liberty: Protecting Civil Liberties, Promoting Human Rights: The Human Rights Act: Exploding the Myths, Publication – 17, May 2006.
Stone, R. (2006) Civil Liberties and Human Rights, (Oxford).
Join the Conversation