Lawyers slam government’s plans to replace Human Rights Act with new ‘Bill of Rights’
Lawyers have slammed the UK government’s plans to dismantle the Human Rights Act and replace it with a new “Bill of Rights”.
The plan, set out in the Queen’s Speech, is set to see the government tear up the UK’s Human Rights Act of 1998, which enshrines the rights guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law.
The move to replace the Human Rights Act with the new Bill of Rights will mean UK courts will no longer be required to follow case law set out by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
If brought into force, the bill is also set to put in place new tests, requiring claimants show they have suffered a “significant disadvantage,” before a human rights claim can be heard in court.
Equally, the new bill will make sure courts take past behavior into consideration when awarding damages in human rights claims.
The government has claimed its new Bill of Rights will curb “the incremental expansion of a rights culture” and “end abuse of the human right framework,” by “establishing the primacy of UK case law” over the ECHR.
In particular, the government argued the new bill will prevent foreign criminals from evading deportation, by using Article 8 of the ECHR – which guarantees the right to family life – to appeal decisions.
‘Political posturing’
Law Society president I. Stephanie Boyce hit out at the plans as she argued dismantling the Human Rights Act 1998 would “make it harder for all of us to protect or enforce our rights”.
The Law Society chief said bringing a new Bill of Rights into force would have “far reaching consequences” by conferring “greater unfettered power” onto the ruling party of the day.
“Weakening rights for some would weaken rights for everyone and undermine the UK’s international reputation for justice and fairness,” Boyce said.
Kirsty Brimelow QC, a barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, called the new bill “political posturing,” as she noted the UK will not actually be leaving the ECHR, after it first ratified the international convention in 1951 in response to the horrors of the Second World War.
The high-profile barrister said the UK will almost certainly not be following in the footsteps of Russia in pulling out of the ECHR, meaning the move will likely mean more claims simply end up being heard in the Strasbourg courts.
Brimelow said the government’s plans to scrap the Human Rights Act will also reduce the UK’s standing on the international stage, as she slammed the plans as “opaque”.
Monckton Chambers barrister George Peretz QC said the new Bill of Rights would be the first “in the common-law world whose purpose is to reduce citizens right and to limit their ability to hold the executive to account when it infringes those rights.”
Alex Shattock, a barrister at Landmark Chambers, warned the bill could “significantly reduce the levels of protection we already have,” by making it harder to bring forward a claim.