the human rights act

As I have previously mentioned, upon the news of the crushing tory majority, I set out to read the Conservative manifesto in a desperate attempt to feel more positive about the next 5 years. Unfortunately, this did not happen. Whilst skimming through the pdf I stumbled upon the Tories plan to abolish the Human Rights Act (HRA), and my heart immediately sank. The manifesto stated that it would abolish the HRA in favour of a 'British Bill of Rights'. Even though it is unknown as to what exactly this alternative entails, I strongly believe that repealing the HRA would be devastating for Britain. 

Firstly, lets just establish what exactly the HRA is. After the second world war, nations gathered together to take measures to avoid the atrocities they had let happen in Germany. They set up the United Nations, and a list of  universal standards of decency for mankind to cling to: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The UDHR would first be incorporated on a continental level, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) which would then be given legal effect in every country. In Britain's case, the Labour government introduced the Human Rights Act in 1998. The rights a citizen is entitled to under this act are things like: the right to life, liberty and security of person; the right to a fair trial; protection from torture and ill treatment; freedom of thought, conscience, religion, speech and assembly; the right to marry; the right to free elections; the right to fair access to the country’s education system; and, to top things off, the right not to be discriminated against. In recent years, the HRA has succeeded in giving a voice and bringing justice to the most endangered in society such as women suffering domestic and sexual abuse, child trafficking victims and those with disabilities - no wonder the Tories want to scrap it. I jest, but honestly, there is a need to be concerned. So if the HRA is such a benefit, then why do they wish to abolish it? 

Many people use the HRA as an argument for Euroscepticism. As I have explained, the ECHR does influence the HRA, which many interpret as one of the many ways that we are shackled by the EU. However, this argument disintegrates twofold. Firstly, the HRA only obliges our courts to "take into account" judgements of the European court, and does not directly control them. Secondly, the HRA is not the legislature that asks the UK courts to take into account the European court judgements, it is Article 46 of the ECHR. So basically, repealing the HRA would have no effect whatsoever on the effect the EU has on Britain. 

What do we know about what is to come, when the act is repealed? The Conservative manifesto says that the new bill will 'break the formal link between British courts and the European Courts of Human Rights'. Theresa May said that Britain could leave the ECHR if British courts did not gain the right to overrule the decisions of the European courts based in Strasbourg, but there have also been comments from 'senior government sources' stating that Britain will not leave the ECHR. So which will it be? If we do leave the ECHR, it will make it severely difficult for people making human rights cases under the ECHR as they would have to travel to Strasbourg for them rather than being able to take them to courts in their own country, thus putting the most vulnerable that I have previously mentioned in more danger. This ECHR hokey cokey, whether we will stay in or out of the ECHR may eventually be dictated by the intentions of this new bill of rights. Theresa May's call for increasing British courts influence may not be compatible with membership of the ECHR because it states that the ECHR ultimately decides cases. Moreover, the development of the new bill of rights is being overseen by Michael Gove, our infamous cabinet minister who thinks we should bring back hanging! which, might I just add, is against the ECHR. 

At the moment, the new Conservative proposal just seems very scary, but primarily because it is unclear what is going to happen. The HRA has created great benefits for many, and acts as an effective reminder to this day of how countries joined together in solidarity to prevent the rise of vicious dictatorships, so why is there a need to repeal it? Like I mentioned in my 'patronage' post, this may be another one of Cameron's steps towards making it easier new radical demands.