header-logo header-logo

11 January 2013 / Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC
Issue: 7543 / Categories: Opinion , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Deadlock & a fudge

A new Bill of Rights is not needed, says Geoffrey Bindman QC

The Commission on a Bill of Rights has just produced its final report which reflects the confused aims and political manoeuvres which motivated its creation. Though it contains some interesting analysis and could be useful should a Bill of Rights be seriously contemplated, that prospect is not advanced by the report, which reaches no clear conclusion. Though a majority of the members say they favour a British Bill of Rights, they do not find any serious flaw in the protection of human rights already provided by the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998). Their only substantial reason is a cosmetic one: a home-grown product would give the public a sense of “ownership”. They supply no draft of a Bill of Rights or any attempt to describe its content. All the members accept that it would be premature to pursue the idea until after the Scottish referendum in 2014.

The commission was launched by the government in March 2011 “to investigate the creation of a UK Bill of Rights that incorporates

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll