Flashcards
LA4 Protection of Civil Rights and Liberties; A Bill of Rights?
Cards in this deck (75)
- 1What is the ECHR and its background?European Convention on Human Rights
Created 1950 by Council of Europe to prevent WWII atrocities
Churchill was the Head of the Council
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) created by the ECHR - 2Pre-1998 (HRA) What were 'residual freedoms'?What you are not allowed to do is set out by law
What you are allowed to do is not set out by law
Therefore, do anything you like unless there is a law prohibiting it - 3Pre-1998 Give an example case where residual freedoms are explainedE.g. Malone v Metropolitan Police Commissioner 1979
Malone's telephone tapped by police
Claimed this removed his right to privacy
However, no law forbidding the police to do this
Therefore, action failed - 4Pre-1998 Residual freedoms are easy to.... and .... to enforce in courtEasy to remove
Difficult to enforce in court - 5Pre-1998 What does 'incorporation' mean?Combined with UK domestic law
Given legal authority - 6Pre-1998 Did the ECHR alter the way Parliament protected our rights?No - Parliament supreme, so they could ignore the ECHR
However, agreed to uphold and mutually enforce
No obligation to ensure they were followed - 7Pre-1998 What was the right of individual petition?Granted 1966
Allowed a UK citizen to go to Strasbourg and claim their human rights against the UK
Could only be done where all forms of remedy had been tried in the UK - 8Pre-1998 Was the right to individual petition popular? Why?No
Cost millions
Took years
However, huge number of cases against the UK - became the 2nd worst in Europe - 9Pre-1998 What happened if the ECtHR declared the UK had acted illegally in regards to an individual's human rights?Would embarrass the UK
Parliament may choose to alter the law
However, no obligation because remained unincorporated
Although it would undermine their diplomatic position if they did not alter the law - 10Pre-1998 Explain how the government responded to the alleged restriction on freedom of expression in regards to contempt of court laws (Sunday Times v UK 1979 case). What does this show about Parliament's attitude to the ECHR pre-incorporation?ECtHR agreed with newspapers (common law contempt was a breach of FOE)
Parliament passed Contempt of Court Act 1981, which reinforced the old common law
However, it did allow more FOE and defences for contempt - 11Pre-1998 Could individuals try to use the ECHR in court?Yes
However, only used as an extrinsic aid to statutory interpretation - 12Pre-1998 What did the courts prefer to use as a source of human rights?The old British Bill of Rights from 1689
Only 1 right remaining - right to fair trial - 13Pre-1998 What did Lord Ackner say in R v Secretary of State ex part Brind 1990, in regards to the use of the ECHR in court?The Convention "cannot be a source of rights and obligations"
And to impose a duty under Article 10 would be to "incorporate the Convention into domestic law by the back door"
So judges not using ECHR to uphold rights - 14Pre-1998 What was said in Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers 1993, as opposed to Brind 1990?There were limited circumstances where the ECHR could be used in UK courts
E.g. where UK statutes are ambiguous, the ECHR could become an extrinsic aid to interpretation - 15Pre-1998 Summarise the effectiveness of the ECHR on the protection of human rights before incorporationProtected
Parliament under international pressure to alter law and protect HRs
DCC v TN - use ECHR as an extrinsic aid in domestic courts
Not protected
ECHR not incorporated - no obligation to uphold
Parliament could reinforce old law, e.g. Contempt of Court Act 1981
Courts preferred old Bill of Rights
Brind 1990 - judges reluctant to use it as an extrinsic aid - 16HRA 1998 What did the Human Rights Act 1998 do?Incorporated the ECHR into UK domestic law
- 17HRA 1998 What does incorporation mean for the status of the ECHR?Must be applied by the State to all Acts of Parliament, past and present unless they have a good reason not to
Human Rights are directly enforceable against public authorities by any person who can demonstrate that their rights have been abused - 18HRA 1998 What Articles were incorporated? Which ones were left out?Articles 2-12 and 14
Articles 1 and 13 left out - 19HRA 1998 Why was Article 1 and Article 13 not incorporated?Article 1 unnecessary
Article 13 - provides "effective remedy" for HR abuses - Parliament did not want to give too much power to the judiciary (this would allow judges to strike out Acts which breached HRs) - 20HRA 1998 What do we have instead of Article 13?We have Section 8 of the HRA 1998
Courts can provide a remedy "within their jurisdiction"
Not as good as Article 13 though, as a remedy within their jurisdiction may not be an 'effective' remedy - 21HRA 1998 What rights to Articles 2-12 and 14 give us?Article 2 - right to life
Article 3 - prohibition of torture
Article 4 - freedom from slavery
Article 5 - right to liberty and security
Article 6 - right to fair trial
Article 7 - freedom from retrospective law
Article 8 - right to privacy and family life
Article 9 - freedom of religion
Article 10 - freedom of expression
Article 11 - freedom of association and assembly
Article 12 - right to marry and family life
Article 14 - freedom from discrimination - 22HRA 1998 What is Section 2 HRA?Judges to 'take into account' the precedents of the ECtHR
Strongly persuasive, but not binding - 23HRA 1998 What was decided in Ullah 2004, in regards to Section 2 HRA?If the precedent from the ECtHR is clear and there is no domestic precedent on the matter, then the ECtHR precedent should be followed
- 24HRA 1998 What was decided in Leeds City Council v Price 2006, in regards to Section 2 HRA?ECtHR precedents should not be followed where there is a conflicting domestic precedent
UK precedent will be used unless it is clearly unlawful in the light of the HRA - 25HRA 1998 What is Section 3 HRA?Allows judges to interpret UK laws compatibly with the Convention 'as far as it is possible to do so' (bear in mind Parliamentary sovereignty)
Use any form of interpretation to make the law HRA-compatible (preferred method is the purposive approach) - 26HRA 1998 What is Section 4 HRA?If an Act cannot be read compatibly, then a Declaration of Incompatibility can be issued
Judge sends declaration to the minister responsible that the statute cannot be interpreted compatibly
Judge must still apply incompatible law - 27HRA 1998 What 4 cases explain how Sections 3 and 4 should be used?R v A 2001 - DOI is a "measure of law resort" - S3 preferred
Re W & B 2002 - words can be read into a statute unless it changes the fundamental aspect of the law
Anderson 2003
Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza 2004 - 3 significant points on the use of S3 and S4 - 28HRA 1998 Explain what was said in Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza 20041 - if words in an Act illegally remove a HR, they can be changed using S3
2 - changes made to restrict or widen definition of a word; judges may add words
3 - judges not allowed to change fundamental aspects of the law (Parliamentary sovereignty) - S4 should be used instead (as a last resort) - 29HRA 1998 What is Section 6 HRA?An individual can sue a public authority for a breach of their human rights
- 30HRA 1998 What two types of organisations can you sue under S6?Standard PAs - never provide a private function, e.g. police, prison, local authority
Functional PAs - have some private and some public functions, but only bound when doing their public function, e.g. doctor bound when working under NHS, but not when working for a private healthcare patient, e.g. BUPA - 31HRA 1998 Can you sue a private body under S6?No - not a public authority
Private bodies make profits whereas public bodies do not - they provide a service to the public
(However, implied horizontal direct effect as in Douglas v Hello 2005 - see later) - 32HRA 1998 Which Acts are private bodies bound by, which help to uphold HRs?Equality Act 2010
Contempt of Court Act 1981 - 33HRA 1998 In deciding whether an organisation is a functional public authority, what did the judge say in Poplar Housing and Regeneration Association v Donoghue 2001?Courts will assess the organisations' proximity of relationship with the State to determine whether they are a FPA or not
- 34HRA 1998 What did the Poplar Housing case say about Housing Associations being a FPA?Not normally considered a PA (Peabody v Green), but a council representative was sent to sit on the governing board
Therefore, council had a say in how things were done, so close proximity to the State
Poplar to be regarded as a FPA - 35HRA 1998 What happened in YL v Birmingham CC 2007?Private care home providing service to the elderly (vulnerable)
Resident sued for breach of HRs - use of tax payer's money meant the care home was a FPA
However, judge decided it was not as there was no proximity with the State, and the care home was using the money to make a profit - 36HRA 1998 What is Section 7 HRA?Individuals can take a case to a domestic court for a breach of their HRs
Strasbourg only an appeal court - 37HRA 1998 What is Section 8 HRA?Courts to provide a remedy 'within their jurisdiction' for HR abuses
- 38HRA 1998 What is Section 10 HRA?Fast track procedure for an amendment to UK law after a S4 DOI
Helps to uphold Parliamentary sovereignty - 39HRA 1998 What is Section 19 HRA?Statement of Compatibility
All Acts of Parliament need one to say whether it does or does not comply with the HRA - 40Limits of the HRA How is the manner of incorporation a limitation to the effectiveness of the HRA?It is only an Act of Parliament - it can be removed at any time
Would lose the protection of our HRs
Probably be kicked out of the EU
ECHR go back to being an extrinsic aid
Go back to the times of residual freedoms - 41Limits of the HRA Why is the decision to omit Article 13 from incorporation a limitation?People who have had their rights breached may not be able to get an effective remedy
i.e. remedy would be striking out the Act, of which the judiciary cannot do - 42Limits to the HRA Why is Section 19 a limitation?Ministers can say they are unable to declare an Act compatible - pass it anyway
Reasons kept secret - 43Limits to the HRA What Act has been introduced without a S19 Statement of Compatibility?Communications Act 2003
Continued ban on political advertising which may be incompatible with Article 10 FOE - 44Limits to HRA Why is S10 a limitation?It fails to force amendments quickly
Minsters only required to change if there is a 'compelling' reason to do so - a DOI is not 'compelling' - 45Limits to the HRA Give an example of where a DOI has not been acted upon quickly, highlighting the ineffectiveness of S19?Blood & Tarbuck v Secretary of State for Health 2003
DOI issued
Conservative Minister blocked new legislation
Eventually went through - 46Limits to HRA Why is S19 bad for those who want the law changed quickly?If the law is not changed quickly, our HRs are still being abused by the government
- 47Limits to the HRA What alternatives are there for us if the government does not change the law quickly?-new government may come into power and push through new legislation
-judges can find a way to interpret the law
-ECtHR may rule against the UK and bring pressure on them to change the law - 48Limits to the HRA S2 says judges should take into account the precedents of the ECtHR. What law is included in this area?ECtHR decisions
Commission decisions
Council of Europe decisions - 49Limits to HRA Why is it a negative that courts are asked to take into account other forms of legal authority?ECtHR, Commission and Council are foreign law makers - there are no safeguards against political opinions or ambitions
European countries do not use precedent like the UK - decisions not followed - 50Limits to the HRA Why is it a negative that only victims can bring a Human Rights case?Pressure groups and trade unions cannot bring cases
This is bad because it means vulnerable, poor, weak and least educated people cannot be represented or have their rights enforced
Therefore, not everyone protected effectively by HRA - 51Limits to the HRA How has the problem of claims only being brought by victims been partly solved?Creation of Commission for Equality and Human Rights - created by Part 3 Equality Act 2006
However, only promotes and monitors HRs
Cannot investigate breaches or enforce changes
Can only make recommendations, unless they find a victim whom they can assist - 52Limits to the HRA Why is Section 6 a limitation?Can only bring claims against PAs and FPAs
Cannot claim against private bodies, as shown by YL v Birmingham CC 2007
HRs not completely protected or fully enforceable - 53Limits to the HRA How has the problem of S6 been partly resolved?Found an ingenious method to help protect Article 8 from HR abuses
Implied horizontal direct effect
E.g. Douglas v Hello Magazine 2005
Bring a case to court under UK law, e.g. trespass and declare HR in court - court is a PA under S6 so have to uphold - 54Limits to the HRA What are the categories of rights?Aboslute - cannot be interfered with at all, e.g. right to life, freedom from torture
Limited - situations listed in the Article where they can be interfered with, e.g. right to liberty and security
Qualified - can be lawfully removed although there is no defined list of situations - only have to prove there is a good enough reason (prescribed by law, necessary in a democratic society and it is proportionate), e.g. freedom of expression - 55Limits to the HRA Why is the categorisation of rights a limitation?Means that we do not always have our rights upheld
Most of them can be interfered with and lawfully removed
Categories are vague and widely drafted - 56Positives of the HRA Between October 2000 and January 2009, the courts have issued only 26 DOIs. Why is this a positive?Implies government has been upholding HRs quite well
Otherwise, courts have been interpreting the law in order to uphold citizens' rights (have shown that S3 is the preferred method - R v A 2001) - 57Positives of the HRA Give some examples of DOIs which have resulted in amendments to the lawA & Others v Home Secretary 2004 - courts forced government to release detainees
Bellinger v Bellinger 2003 - led to Gender Recognition Act 2004 - 58Positives of the HRA How has S3 been used effectively by the courts?R v A 2001 - Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act read in a way to allow the D to have a fair trial (cross-examination of a rape victim despite previous law preventing this from happening)
Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza 2004 - 'as his wife or husband' interpreted to mean 'as if they were his wife and husband' - 59Positives of the HRA How are do the courts have a central role in upholding HRs?S19 is useless - some Acts accompanied by Declarations which are clearly wrong
Up to the judges to do what they can
Use of S3 - R v A; Anderson; Re W and B; Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza
However, not prepared to re-write fundamental aspects of the law
Have S4 DOIs
Award any remedy within their jurisdiction - S8 - 60Bill of Rights If the HRA is ineffective in protecting our HRs, the alternative is a Bill of Rights. What is a Bill of Rights?Document that protects the fundamental freedoms of individuals
It is usually entrenched, so it cannot be easily removed or changed by subsequent parliaments - 61Bill of Rights How is a BOR different to the HRA?HRA can be removed easily
BOR needs public permission - two-thirds of population for it to be changed or removed - 62Bill of Rights What have the Conservative Party said they will do in regards to the HRA?Remove it and replace it with a British Bill of Rights (won General Election of 2015, so this is likely to happen now)
- 63Bill of Rights If we do remove the HRA, how will the UK be affected by the ECHR?Still be protected by it, as Britain is a signatory of the Convention (although may go back to times of residual freedoms and ECHR being an extrinsic aid)
- 64Bill of Rights What two ideas do the Conservatives have to strengthen the protection of human rights in the UK?1 - add to the protection in the ECHR with rights such as right to healthcare, trial by jury and 5 yearly parliaments (and therefore improve public perception of rights)
2 - strengthen the role of Parliament; remove the fast track procedure (S10) and replace it with a requirement that amendments are to be done by full parliamentary debate - 65Bill of Rights What are the difficulties associated with the Conservative ideas?1 - Judges do not like being told how to interpret - that is their job
2 - Adding to the human rights may not improve public perception. It is the judges' decisions that people don't like sometimes
3 - May not be possible to add to the content due to devolution of powers
4 - May not be possible for politicians to agree on what should be included
5 - HRA still new; needs to be given a chance before it is removed - 66Bill of Rights Give an example of who is in favour of a Bill of RightsQC Geoffrey Robertson - "without an entrenched BOR there is no liberty in Britain that is safe from the meddling of politicians"
- 67Bill of Rights What are the 4 main reasons for why we need a Bill of Rights?1 - curbs on the Executive
2 - attitude of the judiciary
3 - updates human rights in line with the needs of the 21st Century
4 - provides the UK with British rights - 68Bill of Rights What would curbs on the Executive do? (Positive for BOR)Protect citizens of the UK from the wide-ranging powers of the government and its agencies
- 69Bill of Rights Why is a BOR needed in regards to the attitude of the judiciary?Allow them to better protect and uphold human rights
Judges currently rarely challenge the laws that remove fundamental freedoms - a BOR would change this - 70Bill of Rights Why is it important that a BOR updates rights in line with today's society?The ECHR was written in the 1950s and enshrines the rights perceived to be needed at the time
Modern days - some people think it is necessary to have environmental and technology rights, etc. - 71Bill of Rights Why do people say a BOR is needed to prove us with British rights?ECHR was drafted by European countries
British people feel they have no ownership over it and therefore, a BOR would be completely British - 72Bill of Rights What are the 3 main reasons against a BOR?1 - increased powers for the judiciary
2 - inflexibility
3 - unecessary - 73Bill of Rights Why is it a bad thing if the judiciary has increased powers?A judge would be able to strike down Acts of Parliament which remove an individual's human rights - this would mean they are overstepping their powers (infringement of the separation of powers), and going against Parliamentary sovereignty
- 74Bill of Rights How does a BOR create inflexibility?It is not easy to alter a BOR
As society changes, it would be difficult to update the rights
For example, the American BOR contains the right to bear arms. Currently, gun laws in the USA are being criticised due to the high level of gun crime, but it is difficult to restrict possession of guns as the BOR allows it - 75Bill of Rights Why would a BOR be unnecessary?Some people argue that we have all the protection we need from the HRA
Information
- Description
- Flashcards for LA4 topic of Civil Rights and Liberties with Bill of Rights. Human rights course (option 3) of the WJEC A2 Law course
- Created by
- shann.w · May 2015
- Updated
- Aug 11, 2017
- Views
- 180
- Tags
- Rating