Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Labour's plans for human rights

Patricia Wynn Davies Legal Affairs Editor
Thursday 19 December 1996 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Individuals and pressure groups would be able to challenge the Government on a wide range of public interest issues under Labour's plans to incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights into British law.

The plans fall a long way short of a domestic Bill of Rights, however, while the party has fudged a key issue by avoiding discussion of whether senior British judges should be empowered to strike down an Act of Parliament for being in breach of convention rights.

A consultation document published yesterday gives no guarantee that even Parliament would make a change in law following an adverse ruling. It says: "Where, after due process UK legislation is ultimately found to be in breach of the ECHR, consideration will need to be given by the government of the day and Parliament as to what action should be taken."

Further seeds of potential conflict are sown by a proposal that Parliament should be entitled to pass Acts specifically derogating from the convention.

These two provisions could mean that the most controversial claims would still have to be pressed all the way to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

On the plus side, Jack Straw, shadow home secretary, and Paul Boateng, shadow minister for the Lord Chancellor's Department, have proposed in the paper a fast-track route to the higher courts for prompt decisions on unusually difficult or controversial issues.

Claims under the convention to Strasbourg can only be brought be individuals or groups who are victims of alleged violations. Labour would broaden the range of potential claimants by including:

t Individuals seeking to vindicate the broader public interest in constitutional government

t Pressure groups who believe their cause may be prejudiced

t Representative group interests whose collective interests may be disadvantaged.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in