The Tories Don’t Understand Human Rights

2
617

We have human rights because we are human, not because we are British.

Forced to abandon NHS bashing for the sake of the election, David Cameron needed to feed the right some red meat. He chose the European Convention on Human Rights, promising to repeal the Human Rights Act, which allows English judges to incorporate the dicta of the Strasbourg court into their rulings, and allow Parliament to ignore the European Court of Human Rights. This is more than simply wrong; it shows a fundamental failure to understand of the role human rights play in international law and politics.

The international law of human rights is based on the premise that there is something fundamentally valuable about each individual human. In this light Cameron’s idea of a “British Bill of Rights” seems absurd. People are not inherently valuable because they are British or French or Afghan. We are valuable because we are human. For this reason that the ECHR applies to British troops fighting abroad. To suggest that people should lose value in our eyes because they are non-European is an attitude redolent of the 13th Century not the 21st.

The ECHR is itself based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It doesn’t invent “European Rights”. It allows citizens of European states direct access to universal rights. It’s worth noting that the UK would remain bound by a plethora of international human rights conventions even if it were to succeed from the ECHR (as the Conservatives threaten). The government’s legal obligations wouldn’t fundamentally change; they would just get more complex.

In practice human rights law protects the vulnerable from the powerful. This is why a bill of rights decided purely by the parliamentary majority is so dangerous. Human rights act as a check on the majority. Courts should make decisions (such as giving prisoners the vote) with which most of us disagree. If they didn’t they wouldn’t be a check on the majority.

Read more

  • PJ London

    I am not a “grammar Nazi” but this is so basic and so wrong that it demands correction.

    “were to succeed from the ECHR” the word is “Secede”, this is English that a 10 year old should write correctly.

    If you cannot speak correctly then you cannot think correctly and you certainly cannot communicate successfully.

  • Mick McNulty

    When the Human Rights Act is gone we’ll see what the do-badders really want to do, and what’s the betting the loudest complainers are the reactionaries who wanted this more than anyone. Their vindictiveness leads to their lack of empathy and ultimately their lack of understanding that they had it so good only because of these laws.