The leader of the Conservative Party has said in an interview on the BBC that they are considering replacing the Human rights Act with a British bill of Rights.
A US-style bill of rights would outline the rights of citizens, while the Human Rights Act incorporates European rules into British law.
Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer said Mr Cameron’s plans were “unworkable”.
The Conservatives have long-pledged to look at the 1998 Human Rights Act, which incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law.
During the 2005 general election campaign, former leader Michael Howard pledged he would revise or scrap the act if elected, claiming prisoners’ rights were being put before those of victims.
A British Bill of Rights sounds like a great idea but it should have been done decades if not centuries ago and is now irrelevant and unworkable now that Britain is signed up to European rights legislation.
Mr Cameron explains that he is not proposing a withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights but instead wishes to set up a panel “to examine the issue to ascertain whether a bill of rights could be given legal status instead.”
Well I would think that such a panel will find that a separate British Bill of Rights will be contradictory with the European Convention on Human Rights and will therefore not be possible for them to exist in parallel.
Both the Government and the Conservative party have been attacking the human rights laws we have claiming they are hindering the fight against crime and terror.
The problem as I see it isn’t the legislation but perhaps it’s application in the courts.
This seems to be all political rhetoric with no real meat to it. Be seen to attack what the tabloid media have portrayed as ridiculous examples of the use of Human Rights Act whilst still being in favour of human rights as a concept.
