header-logo header-logo

11 January 2013 / Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC
Issue: 7543 / Categories: Opinion , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Deadlock & a fudge

A new Bill of Rights is not needed, says Geoffrey Bindman QC

The Commission on a Bill of Rights has just produced its final report which reflects the confused aims and political manoeuvres which motivated its creation. Though it contains some interesting analysis and could be useful should a Bill of Rights be seriously contemplated, that prospect is not advanced by the report, which reaches no clear conclusion. Though a majority of the members say they favour a British Bill of Rights, they do not find any serious flaw in the protection of human rights already provided by the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998). Their only substantial reason is a cosmetic one: a home-grown product would give the public a sense of “ownership”. They supply no draft of a Bill of Rights or any attempt to describe its content. All the members accept that it would be premature to pursue the idea until after the Scottish referendum in 2014.

The commission was launched by the government in March 2011 “to investigate

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll