In a new NLJ mini series, Roger Smith puts human rights under the spotlight
This is the first of four articles to pose the “Goldilocks question” of the Human Rights Act 1998 (the Act). Is it too hot, too cold, or just right? The series is precipitated by the decision of the government to establish a commission to “investigate the creation of a UK Bill of Rights that incorporates and builds on all our obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention), ensures that these rights continue to be enshrined in UK law, and protects and extend our liberties”. This was promised in the post-election coalition agreement and finally announced in March.
Opposites attract
The terms of reference are, frankly, gobbledygook. They have been slaved over by a combination of lawyers, politicians and civil servants with the express objective of melding two completely opposing questions: should the core provisions of the Act be destroyed or defended? The fundamental problem is clear. The Tories went into the election with a promise
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
