Revived Bill of Rights faces opposition in both houses of parliament

Former judges, lawyers and campaigners have warned that controversial human rights legislation which is expected to be reintroduced within weeks risks undermining the UK’s reputation as a legal centre.

The Bill of Rights, unveiled in June by justice secretary Dominic Raab, would replace the 1998 Human Rights Act, which allows individuals to enforce their rights directly in UK courts rather than lodging cases at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

It gives UK courts ultimate authority and would allow judges to diverge from rulings issued by the Strasbourg court although the UK would remain within the European Convention on Human Rights — a treaty protecting standards of human rights.

The Bill is likely to attract the support of MPs on the right of the Tory party who argue that human rights laws are being abused by criminals and illegal migrants and say that the new legislation will make it easier for Britain to control its borders.

But it is likely to face opposition in the House of Lords, because it goes beyond what was promised in the 2019 Tory party manifesto, which was to “update” the Human Rights Act.

Raab has said the bill will make “crystal clear” that the UK Supreme Court was not subordinate to the European Court of Human Rights. “It will put an end to the mission creep of continuously expanding human rights laws, and re-establish proper democratic oversight from Parliament,” he said in a statement.

This is Dominic Raab’s pet project and unworthy of government time when we have so many pressing problems within the justice system

He has said it will “put a stop to the elastic interpretations which are shattering public confidence in human rights, like dangerous criminals claiming a right to family life to try to avoid deportation and the terrorists claiming rights to socialise so they can spread hateful ideologies in prisons”.

Suella Braverman, the home secretary, has signalled her support for the bill. During her leadership campaign she said she would take Britain out of the Convention and leave the Strasbourg court.

But Sir Bob Neill, chair of the parliamentary justice committee, said: “A number of us have concerns. I think it will be much harder for citizens to enforce convention rights and mean more people have to go to Strasbourg.”

In August, ex- justice secretary Sir Robert Buckland said the bill had “useful” sections but warned that its scope was “extremely wide”.

Baroness Helena Kennedy KC, a leading barrister and Labour member of the House of Lords, said the bill increased executive power at the expense of citizens. “It is important to realise that this is Dominic Raab’s pet project and unworthy of government time when we have so many pressing problems within the justice system like a backlog of . . . criminal cases,” she said. 

Sir Peter Gross, a retired Court of Appeal judge who led an independent review of the 1998 Human Rights Act last year, said in a recent lecture that he had “real concerns” and said a “substantive gap” could develop “between rights capable of enforcement in UK courts and the rights enforceable in the Strasbourg court”.

“It would be unwise to undermine either or both the value of UK legal exports and the UK’s leadership role in law by changes to the HRA (Human Rights Act), unless soundly based.” Gross said.

The Bill of Rights was unveiled in June just days after the UK had to comply with an interim injunction, a so-called Rule 39 measure, issued by Strasbourg judges, that blocked the first flight of asylum seekers to Rwanda, in effect scuppering the government’s flagship migrant policy.

It was due to have its second reading before parliament in September until it was scrapped by Liz Truss’s shortlived administration after Raab was fired as justice secretary.

Raab, a long standing ally of prime minister Rishi Sunak, has been reappointed as justice secretary and the largely-unchanged Bill is expected to be brought back before parliament in the next few weeks.

Raab will be grilled by the justice committee of MPs on November 22 about the Bill. The government hopes the Bill will address some perceived challenges of the human rights act and could act as part of the solution to the migration crisis.

Lawyers argue that a key weakness in the Bill is that as long as the UK remains a member of the European Convention it will be subject to the jurisdiction of the Strasbourg court and individuals from the UK will have the right to take their cases there.

They say domestic legislation cannot release the British government from its international treaty obligations.

Lord John Dyson, a former Supreme Court justice, said this month that the Bill “would risk giving rise to years of uncertainty for little or no gain” and placed the UK at risk of “breaching international legal obligations under the Convention and therefore threatens her international reputation as a country that upholds the rule of law and human rights”.

Alison Pickup, director of charity Asylum Aid, said the Bill of Rights would mean that UK courts could in future disregard Rule 39 interim measures issued by Strasbourg: “That means that individuals would have to go straight to Strasbourg to apply for an injunction and there might not be time for them to do this if they are facing imminent removal.” she said.

Liberty, a human rights group, said that the Bill would limit the duties imposed on public authorities that compel police forces and prisons to conduct investigations into deaths in custody.

Grey Collier, advocacy director at Liberty, said: “Raab’s so-called Bill of Rights is a cruel and incoherent mess which was rightly shelved just two months ago and should not now be seeing the light of day.” 

Lubna Shuja, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, said: “The bill would also damage the UK’s reputation as an international leader in upholding citizens’ rights.”

The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and the Convention are separate from the European Union and unaffected by Brexit.

Additional reporting by Jasmine Cameron-Chileshe