AN ANALYSIS OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACT
Dr. Tanvir Orakzai
August 23, 2006
Human Rights Act was prompted due to the enormous abuse which took place during WWII. It forced the 21 European countries to shape up the Council of Europe and sign the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) in 1951. UK played a crucial role in conscripting the draft, under which 41 states vowed to defend a minimum number of fundamental human rights. Before the introduction of Act, an individual could not challenge UK Government for non-compliance with basic human rights; and he/she has to approach the European Court of Human Rights. Even if the case were settled, UK courts would normally take years to decide any case in UK making it an expensive adventure. The British Parliament realized that this practice was unjust, if they were to maintain basic human rights in the United Kingdom. Thus steps were taken to introduce the long awaited Act, which paved the way for greater rights of individual and companies in the United Kingdom.
The Human Rights Act came into effect on October 2nd, 2000. .It applies to all government and local authorities, including courts, except the Parilment in United Kingdom. According to the Act the domestic legislation must be read and agreed upon in a friendly manner without affecting the primary legislation. However the High Court and above bodies are allowed to make declaration for the primary legislation, which is not compatible with the ECHR. The Act will not only offer legal solutions for breach of basic human rights, but the intention is to bring in a gentle way of life in the public service.
The Act since its inception has seen a range of cases on a diverse areas such as “anti-social behaviour, enforcement, housing, and police powers” .The essential part of the Act is Article (6) which is related to civil and criminal litigation. The Article (6) is meant to ensure justice in both civil and criminal litigation. The Article 6(1) explains that, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.
Legal expert believe that the current system may is not well-suited to compete with the Article 6(1) of the Act, and it can take a toll on the government institutes courts and legal proceedings, such as police can be easily sued for negligence. However experts believe that there has always been some way of compensation for the incompatibility. As court makes a declaration of inaptness, the Parliament goes ahead with amendment of the bill to rectify the incompatibility. This has created controversy among the different groups. The Terrorism Act 2005 is one such example, which shows that a new constitutional wrangling may arise sooner and may increase gap in the system.
The full impact of human rights into domestic law is still unexplored. It will take sometime to fully assess the advantages and disadvantages of Human Rights Act. It is needless to say that the basic intention behind the Act is to safe guard the individuals (and companies) in a better way from the misuse of state.
The Human Rights Act came into effect on October 2nd, 2000. .It applies to all government and local authorities, including courts, except the Parilment in United Kingdom. According to the Act the domestic legislation must be read and agreed upon in a friendly manner without affecting the primary legislation. However the High Court and above bodies are allowed to make declaration for the primary legislation, which is not compatible with the ECHR. The Act will not only offer legal solutions for breach of basic human rights, but the intention is to bring in a gentle way of life in the public service.
The Act since its inception has seen a range of cases on a diverse areas such as “anti-social behaviour, enforcement, housing, and police powers” .The essential part of the Act is Article (6) which is related to civil and criminal litigation. The Article (6) is meant to ensure justice in both civil and criminal litigation. The Article 6(1) explains that, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.
Legal expert believe that the current system may is not well-suited to compete with the Article 6(1) of the Act, and it can take a toll on the government institutes courts and legal proceedings, such as police can be easily sued for negligence. However experts believe that there has always been some way of compensation for the incompatibility. As court makes a declaration of inaptness, the Parliament goes ahead with amendment of the bill to rectify the incompatibility. This has created controversy among the different groups. The Terrorism Act 2005 is one such example, which shows that a new constitutional wrangling may arise sooner and may increase gap in the system.
The full impact of human rights into domestic law is still unexplored. It will take sometime to fully assess the advantages and disadvantages of Human Rights Act. It is needless to say that the basic intention behind the Act is to safe guard the individuals (and companies) in a better way from the misuse of state.