No consensus over Bill of Rights

The commission set up to investigate the case for a UK Bill of Rights has failed to reach a consensus.

Seven of the nine members of the Commission on a Bill of Rights, which was set up in March 2011, support such a Bill on the basis it would incorporate and build on the UK’s obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, and would provide no less protection than is currently contained in the Human Rights Act 1998 and the devolution settlements. They said there was a “lack of ownership” by the public of the Human Rights Act and the European Convention, which a Bill of Rights could resolve.

However, Helena Kennedy QC and Philippe Sands QC, disagreed, saying the other members had failed to identify or declare any shortcomings in the Human Rights Act or its application by our courts. They also expressed concern that there could be unintended consequences, for example, “public ownership” could be used to promote the diminution of rights for some people and the decoupling of the UK from the European Convention.

All nine members agreed that any future debate must be “acutely sensitive” to issues of devolution.

Sir Leigh Lewis, the Commission’s chair, says: “We are united in believing that there needs to be respect for the existence of different intellectually coherent viewpoints in relation to the human rights debate, and in believing that the debate needs to be well informed and not distorted by the stereotypes and caricatures that have all too often characterised it in recent years.”

The Commission was composed of Kennedy, Sands, David Edward QC, Lord Faulks QC, Jonathan Fisher QC, Martin Howe QC, Anthony Lester QC, and Anthony Speaight QC.