header-logo header-logo

27 May 2016 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7700 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Uncharted waters

nlj_7700_zander

The House of Lords have questioned the constitutional implications of a British Bill of Rights, notes Michael Zander QC

The wisdom of the government’s plan to replace the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) with a British Bill of Rights was questioned by the Justice Sub-Committee of the Lords EU Committee in a strong report published earlier this month (The UK, the EU and a British Bill of Rights, 12th Report, 2015-16, HL Paper 139, 9 May 2016). The 48-page report is a notable contribution to this ongoing debate.

The report considers the likely impact of a British Bill of Rights on three areas: human rights litigation in national courts under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; the UK’s EU legal obligations and international standing; and the devolved settlements.

Mr Michael Gove, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State, said in evidence to the Committee that the government’s two main objectives in introducing a British Bill of Rights were to restore national faith in human rights, and to give human rights greater national identity. The reforms the secretary of state outlined,

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