Overview

The Bill of Rights Bill aims to reform UK human rights law by replacing the Human Rights Act 1998. It seeks to rebalance the relationship between UK courts, the European Court of Human Rights, and Parliament, emphasizing Parliament's role in striking a balance between different policy aims and human rights.

Description

Key Changes:

The bill repeals and replaces the Human Rights Act 1998. It designates the UK Supreme Court as the final arbiter on the interpretation of Convention rights within UK law. It limits the ability of courts to interpret legislation in a way that expands human rights protections beyond what the European Court of Human Rights has established, unless there is no reasonable doubt the European Court would do so. The bill gives greater weight to Parliament's decisions on balancing competing policy aims and human rights. It clarifies that judgments and interim measures from the European Court of Human Rights are not part of UK law and do not affect Parliament’s right to legislate.

Specific Provisions:

The Bill includes provisions on freedom of speech (giving it significant weight), positive obligations (limiting the ability of courts to impose new ones), public protection (prioritizing public safety when considering the rights of convicted criminals), and limitations on judicial review, including stricter requirements for bringing proceedings and limits on damages.

Specific limitations are also placed on the court’s powers regarding deportation appeals, disclosure of journalistic sources, and granting relief that impacts freedom of expression.

Government Spending

The bill's financial implications are not explicitly detailed in the provided text. However, changes to judicial review processes and limitations on damages awards could potentially lead to reduced government spending on compensation and legal costs, although the extent of these savings is uncertain.

Groups Affected

• Courts: The bill significantly alters the role and powers of UK courts in relation to human rights, potentially reducing their ability to interpret legislation broadly in favour of human rights.
• Government: The bill gives Parliament greater weight in balancing policy aims and human rights, potentially reducing government liability in human rights cases.
• Individuals: Individuals may find it more difficult to successfully bring human rights claims, particularly in areas like judicial review and deportation cases. The changes relating to positive obligations could limit the government's responsibilities to protect individuals.
• Journalists: The bill introduces stricter limits on court orders requiring the disclosure of journalistic sources.
• Foreign Criminals: The bill makes it significantly harder for foreign criminals to challenge deportation orders on human rights grounds.

Powered by nyModel