LONDON, Dec 14 (EFE) – Britain’s conservative Justice Secretary Dominic Raab on Tuesday proposed controversial reforms of Britain’s Human Rights Law to enforce “common sense” and prevent “abuse”. “foreign criminals trying to avoid their deportation”.
In an appearance in the House of Commons, Raab announced the opening of a three-month consultation period, after which a new “Bill of Rights” would be presented to Parliament, which would replace the current text – which incorporates the law. Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) -.
The Minister assured that legislative reforms, criticized by organizations such as Amnesty International (AI), considered the UK to continue to be one of the 47 signatory countries to the ECHR, sponsored in 1950 by the Council of Europe, an agency outside the European Union.
But, he pointed out, British courts would no longer have to take into account the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg (France), which oversees the application of the convention, and the British Supreme Court would be the maximum guarantor. in this country (something that, in practice, is already happening).
Raab stated that the new bill “would strengthen freedom of expression” by replacing certain “European-style” privacy laws and would “more clearly” delineate the differences between the judiciary and the legislature, allegedly by limiting Strasbourg’s influence.
It would also introduce the need to obtain prior judicial “permission” in which the plaintiff must demonstrate that he has suffered “significant harm” before claiming compensation for the violation of his rights, and courts must assess public interest and conduct. plaintiffs when deciding on possible compensation, he said.
In his intervention before the deputies, Raab cited the alleged abuses, the fact that around 70% of the human rights cases won in court (he did not give an absolute figure) were from foreign criminals which they used article 8 -right to family life- to appeal. on deportation order.
The Government’s proposals respond to repeated requests from the far-right sector of the Conservative Party, which considers that the current Human Rights Act places European legislation above national legislation.
In response to the plan, Stephanie Boyce of the Law Society – which represents lawyers in England and Wales – pointed out that judges could now ignore Strasbourg’s jurisprudence “if there is a legal reason to do so” and argued that the majority of the new proposed competencies “already existed”.
“Any reform of these delicate and carefully designed legal instruments must be evidence-based and not driven by political rhetoric,” he ordered.
Martha Spurrier, of the human rights NGO Liberty, said the plan was “an attempt by the Executive to seize more power”, while Amnesty International warned that Britain would align itself with “authoritarian regimes” if it continued to try to impose itself. on the court’s decision “you do not like”. EFE
jm / er / si
© EFE 2021. Redistribution and redistribution of all or any part of the content of the EFE service is expressly prohibited, without the prior and express approval of the EFE SA Agency.