header-logo header-logo

02 April 2009
Issue: 7363 / Categories: Legal News , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Rights (and responsibilities) for all

Human rights need protection not abstract discussion

The Ministry of Justice has launched a Bill of Rights and Responsibilities, reigniting the debate over human rights in the UK.

The wide-ranging green paper, published last week, proposes introducing a raft of new rights to build on existing ones. These include rights relating to free health care and victims of crime.

The paper lists some of the responsibilities of UK citizens and asks whether they should be written in a single document. They include: obeying the law, reporting crimes and co-operating with prosecution agencies; paying taxes; voting and jury service; treating NHS staff with respect; and living within our environmental limits.

Launching the paper, Jack Straw, justice secretary, said: “In difficult times, people need to know that their fundamental rights and freedoms are protected, whatever happens in the world around them, and that others will behave responsibly towards them.
“That is why the government has emphasised the importance of fair chances, fair rules and having a fair say; that everyone should play by the rules.
“We believe it is important that people know their rights and their responsibilities. That common knowledge helps bind us together as a nation.
“This government is proud to have introduced the Human Rights Act and will not backtrack from it or repeal it. But we believe more should be done to bring out the responsibilities which accompany rights.
“We also believe that there could be merit in bringing together rights such as free health care, victims’ rights and equality, which are currently scattered across the UK’s legal and political landscape.”

Eric Metcalfe, director of human rights, Justice, says: “It’s a very thoughtful paper, but ultimately we question whether this is the right time to be having an abstract discussion about a Bill of Rights when the Human Rights Act is still in need of protection.

“We do believe that there’s a case for adding new rights, but it is important to protect existing rights, particularly while the opposing party is pledged to repeal the Human Rights Act. There have been a lot of misconceptions about the Human Rights Act and it is important to inform people about these. For example, it seems to be put out in the press that the courts are overriding the democratic will of Parliament, and that’s not true. It is always open to Parliament to pass the laws that it wants.”
 

Issue: 7363 / Categories: Legal News , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Chair of the Association of Pension Lawyers joins as partner

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Group names Shakespeare Martineau partner head of Sheffield office

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Four legal directors promoted to partner across UK offices

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll