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

Discuss whether incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into the domestic legislation of the UK via the Human Rights Act 1998 compromises Parliamentary sovereignty.

Extracts from this document...


National and International Legal Systems Ll1SO4 Assessed coursework 2 The Doctrine of sovereignty of Parliament is a dominant and characteristic feature of English Constitutional Law and Theory. Dicey states that: The principle of Parliamentary sovereignty means neither more nor less than this; namely that Parliament has, under English constitution, the right to make or unmake any law whatever; and further that no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament. In light of this statement discuss whether incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into the domestic legislation of the UK via the Human Rights Act 1998 compromises Parliamentary sovereignty. For this question the first concept that we need to look at is Parliamentary sovereignty. This concept of Parliamentary sovereignty means, in theory at least, that Parliament is the supreme law making body in our constitution and that these laws take precedence over any other laws, i.e., common law derived from the courts. The most famous definition comes from A.V Dicey of which the above statement has come from. From this statement we can see that he believes that Parliament is the supreme law maker, Parliament can legislate on any matter whatsoever, no Parliament can be bound by a predecessor and that no person or body can question the validity and competence of Parliament's enactments.1 Next we need to focus on the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). ...read more.


The case of McCann v UK (1995)8 involves this particular right in that it was held that a state has a positive duty to protect life and that they cannot take it. Another right that has been incorporated is the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 3). This is a right that cannot be derogated from at any time, not even during war. This also places a positive duty on the state not to engage in torture or degrading treatment and to ensure that this does not happen in its own state. The UK was in breach of this in the case of Ireland v UK.9 Unlike Article 3 Article 5, the right to liberty and security of person can be derogated from in times of war and national emergency. As in the case of A and Others v Home dept. (2002)10 The last one we will look at is Article 6, the right to a fair trial. This is linked to due process and Art.6(1) provides that every person has a right to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time and by an independent and impartial tribunal. The UK will no doubt have to make changes to the law of evidence in order to be in accordance with this particular Convention right. The case of R v Lambert [2001]11 deals with this Article. The defendant appealed after the commencement of the Act. This case involved the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 which included a reverse burden of proof. ...read more.


Many academics have argued that we have not 'lost' or had our sovereignty undermined as we have only 'lent it out', this being because we may withdraw from the European Union at any time that we want. In all fairness this is unlikely to happen as it could cause problems with international trade etc and that they is not any sign of this emerging or even being contemplated. However if there was to be an entrenched Bill of Rights placed in our law, which some have said the HRA is only a stepping stone towards, then this last argument and maybe this entire question of the undermining of our Parliaments sovereignty would need to be looked at once again and reconsidered. 1 Barnett.H., 2002. Constitutional and Administrative Law. 4th ed. Cavendish Publishing Ltd. Page 192 2 Blackburn.R., Polakiewicz.J., 2001. Fundamental Rights in Europe. Oxford University Press. Oxford. Page 6. 3 Ibid. Page 3. 4 Fenwick.H., 1999. Civil Liberties. 2nd Ed. Cavendish Publishing Ltd. London. Page 17. 5 Infra n.12 6 [2000] Crim. L.R. 767 7 Stone.R., 2000. Textbook on Civil Liberties and Human Rights. 3rd Ed. Blackstone Press. London. Page 27. 8 (1995) 21 EHRR 97 9 (1978) 2 EHRR 25 10 11 [2001] UKHL 37 12 Smith.S.H., Ching.J.P.L., Gunn.M.J., Ormerod.D.C., Smith, Bailey & Gunn on the Modern English Legal System. 2002. Sweet and Maxwell Ltd. London. Page 525. 13Ibid. Page 526. 14 Supra n.11 15 [2002] EWHC 195 16Supra n.12. Page 299. 17 Ewing.K.D ed., 2000. Human Rights at Work. The Institute of Employment Rights. London. Page 8. 02005514 ...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. Free essay

    How effective are domestic and international legal measures in dealing with human trafficking?

    The brothel was owned by the defendant, Wei Tang. Each woman entered into an agreement in Thailand to come to Australia to work in the sex industry. Their agreements required them to incur a debt of between $35,000 and $45,000 AUD which they would pay off by servicing clients of the brothel.

  2. "In form, the Human Rights Act (HRA) is compatible with parliamentary sovereignty. In practice, ...

    The HRA plays a similar role in respect of the ECHR to that played by the European Communities Act 1972 in respect of the European Community. But the similitude ends there because the terms of the domestic incorporation of the ECHR are notably different from those contained in the ECA (Tomkins, 2003).

  1. The most conventional meaning of the 'legislative supremacy of Parliament' was adopted by Dicey

    Since provisions in the 1988 Act were 'disapplied' under the term s 2(4) of the European Communities Act 1972. The 1972 Parliament had, in the words of Sir William Wade (see previously Wade), 'succeeded in binding the Parliament of 1988 and restricting its sovereignty, something that was supposed to be constitutionally impossible'.


    instrument is often obvious, or at least the amount of power that is being granted. One problem with the scrutiny of delegated legislation is that there is no guarantee of the government or opposition providing time for debate, and even when there is debate it is likely to be attended by very few members late at night.

  1. Outcome (3): Analyse the provisions relating to the police powers of arrest, search, seizure, ...

    This may include things like clothes worn by the person in question, or items carried by them. The only items that may not be seized are those 'subject to legal privilege' (Bevan, 1991; 145). However they must not seize evidence for longer than required, as it was in Ghani v Jones 1970.

  2. To what extent do you think these aims have been (or will be) facilitated ...

    27 4 National Provincial Bank Ltd. v. Ainsworth [1965] Lord Wilberforce "Before a right or an interest can be admitted into the category of property, it must be definable, identifiable by third parties, capable in its nature of assumption by third parties, and have some degree of permanence or stability".

  1. How has the European Court of Human Rights contributed to the protection of children's ...

    19; the case made no impact in UK15, where parents could still legitimately claim reasonable chastisement defence, while Sweden - Parenthood and Guardianship Code 1983, Chapter 6, Section 1 - Norway and Finland16 had already banned all parental physical punishment.

  2. Assess the impact of the European Convention on Human Rights on UK law.

    The UK has one of the worst records in Europe; only Italy has a worst record, of breaching Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. A Bill of Rights would protect UK citizens against such breaches. There are advantages of having a Bill of Rights, the main two being restricting the executive and the attitude of the judiciary.

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