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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll