On 9 November 2018 the UK celebrated 20 years of the Human Rights Act. The anniversary is cause for recognition, but also a reminder that it was only 20 years ago that a specific framework of human rights was incorporated into domestic law in the UK.
The Human Rights Act 1998 incorporated the rights and liberties enshrined in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic law for the first time, meaning citizens could now take their complaints to British courts, and representing a major turning point for protecting human rights in Britain. Until the Human Rights Act 1998 there wasn’t legal recourse in Britain to challenge human rights abuses. In a Rights Info report of 9 November, Anthony Lester a distinguished British barrister and politician, who fought the first British case at the ECHR, said,
“In the absence of effective remedies victims had to take cases to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.”
New Labour
The Human Rights Act became central to the Labour Party’s 1997 manifesto. Under the leadership of Tony Blair, the party pledged the implementation of the Human Rights Act in its election manifesto, stating,
“We will by statute incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law to bring these rights home and allow our people access to them in their national courts.”
“We will seek to end unjustifiable discrimination wherever it exists.”
The party then brought their promise into play as the Human Rights Act was passed through parliament and then received royal assent on 9 November 1998. It then came into force in October 2000, demonstrating one of Blair’s ‘New Labour’ successes.
Landmark Cases Helped by the Human Rights Act 1998
Proof of the success and significance of the Human Rights Act is represented in the numerous cases that have been won due to its implementation. Landmark cases that were helped because of the Act include the Hillsborough football disaster, in which families were able to use the Act to uncover the truth about how their loved ones died.
Inquiries into the Grenfell Tower Fire of 2017 have also been assisted by the use of the Human Rights Act, with four articles specifically relevant to the case: Article 2 – right to life, Article 3 – the right not to be subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment, Article 8 – right to respect for private and family life, and Article 1 – the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Similarly, the Windrush scandal of this year has been criticised as being in breach of the Human Rights Act for being ‘inhuman and degrading’ and contrary to Article 3 and Article 8 of the Human Rights Act.
The Human Rights Act pushed forward equal rights for unmarried couples such as Siobhan McLaughlin and John Adams. Ms McLaughlin won a case in which the Supreme Court ruled that ‘to deny a widow bereavement benefits because she and her partner of 23 years were unmarried was discriminatory and a breach of article 14 (non-discrimination) and article 8 (private and family life) of the Human Rights Act.
Other landmark cases that mobilised the Human Rights Act 1998 include; freedom of the press, a case of police
retaining DNA and fingerprints of innocent people and equal rights for gay couples, amongst many others.
Lester said the Human Rights Act 1998 was so significant,
“Because for the first time there were effective domestic remedies.”
Impact of Brexit
It has been well highlighted by human rights lawyers and NGO’s, that a human rights deficit will be created by the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. After Brexit the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights will no longer have effect in UK law and we will not be able to gain any new rights that may be brought in by the EU.
Trevor Tayleur, an associate professor at the University of Law, spoke to the Guardian about the impact Brexit would have on human rights, explaining why the Human Rights Act may be more limited after Brexit. He said,
“At present, the main means of protecting human rights in the UK is the Human Rights Act 1998,” he said.
“This incorporates the bulk of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the European convention on human rights into UK law and thereby enables individuals to enforce their convention rights in the UK courts. However, there is a significant limitation to the protection afforded by the HRA because it does not override acts of parliament.”
A recent Amnesty report emphasises the possibility of reduced power of the Act after Brexit, ‘despite the clear benefits for human rights in the UK of the legislation, there have been repeated threats to remove or repeal the act by successive politicians.’ Summarising why the UK’s exit from the EU could damage the work that the Act has developed over the past 20 years.