• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Argue for and against the incorporation of the Human Right Act into British law

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Politics essay Argue for and against the incorporation of the Human Right Act into British law. The Human Rights Act came in force in 2000 and has been successful in UK. This is because after a year Michael Beloff QC pointed out in The Times that 15% of the cases brought in the high court with Human Rights Act implication had been successful. The Act has the effect of in cooperating the European convention on Human Rights into British law. The home secretary Jack Straw said "these are the new rights for the new millennium. The Human Rights Act is the most important peace of constitutional legislation the UK has ever seen". A citizen is a member of state who expects the state to protect them but also has duties towards it. Being a good citizen means contributing to society and follows the law. Jack Straw described this as "Rights flow from duties-not the other way around. One person's freedom is another person's responsibility". The main reason for the new Human Rights bill is to protect citizens and their civil liberties under three categories-: fundamental rights such as to life, procedural rights such as the right to trail and qualified rights such as the freedom of expression. ...read more.

Middle

All these matters can now be protected in British courts. It is also true the political bodies must protect the rights or risk having to charge a decision or pay compensation. Parliament will legally stay sovereign. A determined-enough government, which feels that it has a mandate to set aside one of the rights contained in the convention, can do this if it can persuade parliament to back it. In such circumstances, there is nothing that the Judiciary can do about except to draw public attentions to the facts. There is basically going to be a balance of power between parliamentary sovereignty and the law. This is exactly what Professor Peele said that not only will there be a balance of power between the judiciary and Parliament but also the Act will put checks on parliament - "the human rights act is a dynamic piece of legislation with the potential to alter the balance between the government and the governed in a political system where hitherto there have been a few checks on the power of the state". The French philosopher Montesquieu introduced the area of the separation of power as an important part of representative government. ...read more.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the overall picture is mixed. Judges do have great powers, especially under the Human Rights Act, but they cannot overrule parliament and many of our rights remain rather vague. The judiciary cannot enforce rights against the will of a determined parliament. The independences of the judiciary mean that the political cannot interfere with judges. This means that the judges will take a neutral position in cases about the relations between the people and the government. Judges also must not be members of a political party or express political views. They should not just be independent; they must be seen to be independent. The importance of the act is that it might prevent government from abusing our rights. Ministers and civil servants will have to be careful in case a decision or a proposed law offends the act. This way the cause of human rights will be much advanced in Britain. We don't have a bill of rights like the US or France but we do have a set of rights - we need protection from the government minds (e.g. Blair went to war when the electorate was against it). ?? ?? ?? ?? 1 Zainab Hassanali ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Sources of Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Sources of Law essays

  1. Why was the Apprenticeship system brought to an end in 1838 in the British ...

    Although the whip was abandoned in some colonies, in others it was still in service. In areas where it was still used, a threat of violence by an apprentice upon his master would likely have earned him fifteen to thirty nine stripes; everywhere it would have been a cause for a brief imprisonment.

  2. Explain the distinction between the law and morals and consider the importance of the ...

    person and are supposed to take all characteristics in to consideration following the case of Smith.

  1. Unmarried fathers and their children - has the law got it right?

    Marriage after birth, Adoption and Surrogacy.15 It is apparent that married parents (both mother and father) enjoy parental responsibility, purely because their child is legitimate. But even then they continue to enjoy it in a variety of circumstances. The question has to be asked whether the concept of 'legitimacy' is actually all that important?

  2. Discuss whether incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into the domestic legislation ...

    of privacy, night therefore in an appropriate case, justify an application under the ECHR against the United Kingdom"7 In 1998 the Human Rights Act (HRA) was enacted which incorporated the ECHR in English domestic law. The HRA incorporates all the substantive rights of the ECHR into domestic law, except for

  1. Free essay

    heirachy of civil courts

    may agree that an independent arbitrator, probably from ACAS, is called in. Many contract feature an arbitration clause (known as a Scott v Avery clause), with both parties to the contract agreeing in advance that any future unresolved disputes will be referred fro arbitration.

  2. Understanding Young People, Law and Order

    If the defendant pleads guilty, the judge will decide an appropriate sentence. Criminal trials usually take place in open court - which means that members of the press and public are allowed to hear proceedings. If a defendant pleads 'not guilty', the prosecution and defence form opposing sides.

  1. Should people have a right to privacy?

    court room, this is seen as a very serious offence and can lead to a prison sentence. However, regarding legal restrictions on photography, in the United Kingdom one cannot stop photography of private property from a public place. This is supported by the legal case of Max Mosley.

  2. The Nature of Law in Society

    within which the present indictment falls. It matters little what label is given to the offending act. To one of your Lordships it may appear an affront to public decency, to another considering that it may succeed in its obvious intention of provoking libidinous desires, it will seem a corruption of public morals.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work