header-logo header-logo

Questions raised over Bill of Rights

01 September 2016
Issue: 7712 / Categories: Legal News , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Constitutional law experts have expressed doubt that a Bill of Rights will ever be introduced.

Liz Truss, the Lord Chancellor, has said she will replace the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) with a Bill of Rights, as promised in the Conservative manifesto. A draft Bill was drawn up under her predecessor, Michael Gove.

However, Professor Michael Zander QC remains sceptical. Withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) or “any watering down of the rights available under the ECHR, would be fiercely opposed not only by Labour, Liberal Democrat and Scottish and Welsh MPs but by the Dominic Grieve faction in the Conservative Party,” he says. “[The Prime Minister] may decide that this is a battle she does not need.”

NLJ columnist Geoffrey Bindman QC says: “We already have a Bill of Rights. It is ECHR as embodied in HRA 1998.

“Bills of Rights elsewhere, such as the USA, where it forms part of the Constitution, override all other laws, giving the judges power to invalidate inconsistent legislation. HRA 1998 does not have that superiority but a ‘declaration of incompatibility’ provides a simplified parliamentary procedure for bringing other laws into line with it. It is unlikely that a UK parliament would choose to cede sovereignty to the judges. The HRA 1998 model seems the right one for Britain.”

On existing human rights case law if the government did proceed with its plans, Neil Parpworth, De Montfort University, says: “I would have thought it likely that if the new Bill of Rights sought to protect essentially the same rights as those protected under ECHR (and therefore HRA 1998), the body of human rights jurisprudence which has arisen under the Act will have an ongoing relevance and importance.

“In other words, the scope and extent of substantive rights is not likely to change very much in the eyes of the judges unless, that is, the new Bill were to provide for additional limits or qualifications which do not currently exist.”

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson says: “We will set out our proposals for a Bill of Rights in due course. We will consult fully on our proposals.”

Issue: 7712 / Categories: Legal News , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
Transferring anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing supervision to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) could create extra paperwork and increase costs for clients, lawyers have warned 
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022
Writing in NLJ this week, Hanna Basha and Jamie Hurworth of Payne Hicks Beach dissect TV chef John Torode’s startling decision to identify himself in a racism investigation he denied. In an age of ‘cancel culture’, they argue, self-disclosure can both protect and imperil reputations
As he steps down as Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Julian Flaux reflects on over 40 years in law, citing independence, impartiality and integrity as guiding principles. In a special interview with Grania Langdon-Down for NLJ, Sir Julian highlights morale, mentorship and openness as key to a thriving judiciary
Dinsdale v Fowell is a High Court case entangling bigamy, intestacy and modern family structures, examined in this week's NLJ by Shivi Rajput of Stowe Family Law
back-to-top-scroll