7. Human rights and fundamental freedoms

Author(s):  
Steve Wilson ◽  
Helen Rutherford ◽  
Tony Storey ◽  
Natalie Wortley

This chapter considers the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and its relationship to the English legal system. As an international treaty the ECHR is not part of UK law unless it is incorporated into the law. By the Human Rights Act 1998 Convention Rights are incorporated into UK law. By the Human Rights Act 1998 the courts are able to interpret legislation under s.3 to achieve compatibility with the ECHR but are not empowered to strike down legislation incompatible with the Convention. This preserves parliamentary sovereignty. The courts may give a declaration of incompatibility. The UK courts are not bound by decisions of the European Court of Human Rights but must take such decisions into account. It is unlawful for a public authority to act incompatibly with Convention Rights.

2001 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keir Starmer

The European Conversion for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) is an international treaty of the Council of Europe. It was adopted in 1950, ratified by the UK in 1951 and entered into force in 1953. The unsual feature of the Convention, as an international human rights instrument, is that it provides a mechanism for individuals to enforce their Convention rights against state parties.


Author(s):  
Duncan Fairgrieve ◽  
Dan Squires QC

The following chapter examines claims that can be brought under the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA). The HRA makes it unlawful for a ‘public authority’ to breach the European Convention on Human Rights (‘the Convention’). The HRA accords to the victims of a breach of the Convention the right to pursue a claim against the offending public authority in the UK courts, when previously they were required to apply to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg to vindicate their Convention rights.


2019 ◽  
pp. 387-412
Author(s):  
Anne Dennett

This chapter addresses the Human Rights Act 1998. The Human Rights Act provides two ways for the courts to ensure compliance with Convention rights: where legislation is not human rights-compliant; and where a public authority has acted incompatibly with an individual's rights. By providing a new benchmark for measuring UK legislation for compatibility with Convention rights, the Act gives judges a powerful interpreting role which effectively allows them to review Acts of Parliament. At the same time, the Act was carefully drafted to respect and preserve parliamentary sovereignty and does not give the UK courts power to invalidate, overrule, or strike down an Act of Parliament that is incompatible with a Convention right; and while the Human Rights Act has special status as a constitutional statute, it is not entrenched and cannot override other statutes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 232-267
Author(s):  
Steve Foster

The Human Rights Act 1998 came into force in October 2000, its purpose to allow victims of alleged violations of rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights (1950) to pursue a remedy in the domestic courts. Thus, central to the Act’s purpose is to enable the access of the rights and remedies already provided by the machinery of the European Convention, subject only to those provisions of the Act which seek to retain the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. The purpose of this article is to study the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in relation to cases brought against the United Kingdom in order to examine the United Kingdom’s record under the Convention and, hopefully, of identifying common themes of human rights violations for which the United Kingdom has consistently been held responsible, and for which they may remain vulnerable to challenge in the future. At this stage it will be submitted that the European Convention has exposed the limitations of human rights protection in domestic law, and that on many occasions both the courts and Parliament have failed to adopt the necessary jurisprudence of the European Court in their respective roles. Finally, in the light of that evidence the article will examine the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 in order to assess the likely impact of that Act on the protection of rights and liberties in the United Kingdom.


2020 ◽  
pp. 255-292
Author(s):  
Steve Wilson ◽  
Helen Rutherford ◽  
Tony Storey ◽  
Natalie Wortley ◽  
Birju Kotecha

This chapter considers the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and its relationship to the English legal system. The focus in the chapter is on key provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998—the Act that incorporated the Convention into UK law. In the earlier part of the chapter there is coverage of sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Act. These provisions concern the duties placed on the courts to take into account judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, to interpret domestic legislation so as to comply with rights under the Convention, and finally to issue a declaration of incompatibility when domestic legislation does not comply with rights under the Convention. Using examples from the case law, the chapter assesses how the courts balance their constitutional role to respect the supremacy of Parliament, with the duties provided in the Act to respect rights under the Convention. There is also an analysis of s.6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 which makes it unlawful for a public authority to act incompatibly with Convention rights. The analysis includes the contested question of what precisely constitutes a ‘public authority’, particularly when a private body is carrying out a public function.


2021 ◽  
pp. 409-433
Author(s):  
Anne Dennett

This chapter addresses the Human Rights Act 1998. The Human Rights Act provides two ways for the courts to ensure compliance with Convention rights: where legislation is not human rights-compliant; and where a public authority has acted incompatibly with an individual’s rights. By providing a new benchmark for measuring UK legislation for compatibility with Convention rights, the Act gives judges a powerful interpreting role which effectively allows them to review Acts of Parliament. At the same time, the Act was carefully drafted to respect and preserve parliamentary sovereignty and does not give the UK courts power to invalidate, overrule, or strike down an Act of Parliament that is incompatible with a Convention right; and while the Human Rights Act has special status as a constitutional statute, it is not entrenched and cannot override other statutes.


Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Simms [1999] UKHL 33, House of Lords. The case considered whether the Secretary of State, and prison governors, could restrict prisoners’ access to journalists investigating alleged miscarriages of justice. In addition to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) Article 10 issues this raises, Lord Hoffmann also in obiter dicta discussed the relationship between the Human Rights Act 1998, parliamentary sovereignty, and the concept of legality. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.


Author(s):  
John Stanton ◽  
Craig Prescott

One of the most fundamental aspects of any constitution are the provisions and measures that protect the rights and freedoms of individuals. In the UK, rights protection is markedly different to that in America, in chief because there is no entrenched Bill of Rights. Rights protection is dominated by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), incorporated by the Human Rights Act 1998, which sets out a number of positive rights that are actionable in the UK courts This chapter discusses the ways in which these rights are protected in the UK Constitution. It discusses the courts' historic civil liberties approach and common law protection of rights, before then examining the development, incorporation, and application of the ECHR. The chapter also explores the way in which the various sections of the Human Rights Act 1998 work to ensure appropriate enforcement and protection of rights in UK law.


Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Handyside v United Kingdom (1979-80) 1 EHRR 737, European Court of Human Rights. This case concerned a book which breached the Obscene Publications Act 1959. The publisher, Handyside, contended that the domestic law (the 1959 Act) breached his Article 10 rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. The case introduced the concept of the ‘margin of appreciation’ accorded to states as regards the implementation of convention rights. The case predates the passage of the Human Rights Act 1998. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.


Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Mosely v United Kingdom [2011] ECHR 774, European Court of Human Rights. This case provides an exemplar of the challenges of balancing Article 8 and Article 10 rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights in the context of press regulation. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document