Interaction on rights developments in UK

What would the implications be for individuals, State actors, organisations, regional block (ECHR)? To what extent is a new single legislation needed to harmonise a range and web of complex legal system existing already on human rights? Should we envisage an enlargement of the scope to cater for individual needs beyond actions against public authorities? Again, its specific relevance to the individual rights in education, justice arrangement, processes within UK court jurisprudence, legality of campaign activities etc can be inferred.

@ policy exchange UK

“Questions about how or whether to reform human rights law continues to be a source of political and legal controversy. The Government has now withdrawn the Bill of Rights Bill, which was to have replaced the Human Rights Act 1998. It remains to be seen whether new legislation will be brought forward in its place, and what shape such legislation will take, including in relation to difficult questions about immigration and asylum. Possible changes to domestic human rights law are connected also to the merits of membership of the European Convention on Human Rights, which remain hotly disputed, not least in light of the European Court of Human Rights’s recent intervention in relation to deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda. This panel event will discuss the case for human rights law reform and the obstacles to and practicalities of reform, taking into account domestic legislation, international law, and related parliamentary dynamics. Speakers Include: Rt Hon Brandon Lewis CBE MP, Secretary of State for Justice, Lord High Chancellor Simon Murray, Barrister Rt Hon Lord Faulks KC, Chairman, Independent Press Standards Organisation Richard Ekins, Head of Judicial Power Project, Policy Exchange Lord Godson, Director, Policy Exchange (Chair)” October 2, 2022 CPC Birmingham UK

Open consultation, HR Act 1998 review

The Ministry of Justice, has opened a call for contributions towards expanding and making clearer UK’s commitments to human rights. The document released today, December 14 2021, is titled “Human Rights Act Reform: A Modern Bill Of Rights. A consultation to reform the Human Rights Act 1998.”

Responses to:
https://consult.justice.gov.uk/human-rights/human-rights-
act-reform
Alternatively, you can also send your response via post
or email to:
Human Rights Team
International, Rights and Constitutional Policy Directorate
Ministry of Justice
102 Petty France
London SW1H 9AJ
Tel: 020 3334 3555
Email: HRAreform@justice.gov.uk

Deadline: 8 March 2022

Para 1-

“This command paper sets out, and seeks views on, the government’s proposals to
revise and replace the Human Rights Act 1998 with a Bill of Rights.”

Para 9-

“Specifically, the Bill of Rights will:
• retain all the substantive rights currently protected under the Convention and the
Human Rights Act 1998. Some rights, such as the right to freedom of expression
(paragraph 204 onwards), will be strengthened and others, such as the right to trial by jury, added, reflecting the UK’s specific history and traditions (paragraph
202 onwards);
• empower domestic courts to apply human rights in the UK context, taking into
account our common law traditions and judicial practice amongst other common
law nations, not merely the case law of the Strasbourg Court, and strengthen the
primacy of the UK Supreme Court in determining the proper interpretation of such
rights (paragraph 190 onwards);
• provide greater clarity regarding the interpretation of certain rights, such as the
right to respect for private and family life, by guiding the UK courts in interpreting
the rights and balancing them with the interests of our society as a whole
(paragraph 282 onwards);
• implement a permission stage, similar, but not identical, to those in other
branches of law, to ensure that spurious cases do not undermine public
confidence in human rights (paragraph 219 onwards); and strengthen the courts’
discretion when granting remedies for human rights breaches (paragraph 224
onwards);
• restrain the ability of the UK courts to use human rights law to impose ‘positive
obligations’ onto our public authorities without proper democratic oversight
(paragraph 229 onwards);

• make sure that the UK courts are not required to alter or interpret legislation
contrary to Parliament’s clearly expressed democratic will (paragraph 233
onwards);
• provide more certainty for public authorities to discharge the functions Parliament has given them, without the fear that this will expose them to costly human rights litigation (paragraph 266 onwards);
• safeguard the vital protection for the right to life and the absolute prohibition on
torture, confirming that people should not be deported to face torture (or inhuman
or degrading treatment or punishment) abroad, whilst ensuring that other rights in
the Act cannot be used to frustrate the deportation of serious criminals and
terrorists (paragraph 292 onwards);
• recognise that responsibilities exist alongside rights, and that these should be
reflected in the approach to balancing qualified rights and the remedies available
for human rights claims (paragraph 302 onwards); and
• enact a process, centred on Parliament, for assessing the implications of
judgments from the Strasbourg Court for the UK, including providing a ‘democratic
shield’ preserving Parliamentary sovereignty in the exercise of the legislative function (paragraph 309 onwards).”

Furthermore, rather helpfully Appendix 1 provide “some non-exhaustive examples of domestic legislation and common law principles which cover some of the same ground” of the current HR Act.

Being considerate: building a society that harbours others

Being considerate

Would it be essential to infuse a system of reminders into infrastructure? I contemplate where those with special needs are a vibrant part of society, whether prompts and highlight could be a consistent and tactful component.

A person prone to forgetfulness, walking down a pathway may need a guide towards a main hub; same for staff who may tend to forget a policy in a week, and may need daily briefings of expectations. The implication is huge, especially if a huge sector is affected. This is the goal for a march towards constant improvisation and efficiency. The human tendency could be framed as individually driven and could bother on complacency, but also with age and a weakening of the capacity for articulation, perhaps, the need for more ready stimulation and support.

Could media outlets play a role? Could better use of sound systems at train and bus stations – at public spots help? How about brief notices on decorum and civic responsibilities? How about shaping an empathetic society by showing how people work together, and cope by being more tolerant? Isn’t this what celebratory days are meant to achieve?- a somewhat of a recalibration to remind ourselves of expectations.

Prospects are intriguing- of tech working seamlessly with environment, but it has to be built on algorithms that promotes goodwill. There is no point writing codes that sniffs negativity and faulty values. We may need to explore first, by finding who specifically wrote it. A chance to explain and guide is always very refreshing. Researchers might want to explore funding for the long term with implications on reducing criminality. Again, a discussion that remains to be had, is whether with tragic penury, strategic instructional and momentary briefs has a limited role- no doubt this remains a complex revision-able area.

“Hey, its a beautiful day. Remember to pay your taxes, and stay to the left of the road.”