Sir, The Lord Chancellor in a radio interview was critical of a new “human rights culture” which he said was endangering public safety. He blamed this on the interpretation of the Human Rights Act, which was passed in 1998 to incorporate into our domestic law the European Convention on Human Rights. Lord Falconer threatened to amend that Act, although the Prime Minister has been hinting at its wholesale repeal and directly questioned the “common sense” of the interpretation of one of its provisions by a High Court judge.

Contrary to recent allegations, the predicted flood of cases under the Human Rights Act never materialised and the courts have dismissed many more claims under its ambit than they have upheld.

The dramatic events of the past fortnight, which have so inflamed public opinion, have been caused as much by administrative incompetence as by anything else and the Government should not get away with diverting blame upon the interpretation of a convention which sets standards which are accepted as minimal across Europe, East and West. Nor should they disregard another of their own laws, promoted by Lord Falconer only last year, namely, the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, which requires all ministers of the Crown “to uphold the continued independence of the judiciary”.

JEFFREY JOWELL, QC
Professor of Public Law
University College London

Sir, To say that allowing the Afghan hijackers to stay in this country highlights a defect in the 1998 Human Rights Act (report and Thunderer, May 12) is a gross misjudgment. We must remember that, in 2003, these nine men were cleared of criminal convictions on the ground that they were acting under duress. It was in 2004, when they were in theory free men, that their deportation was refused on human rights grounds.

Any argument about the merits of human rights legislation must take into account the facts of this case. It should also be remembered that the Human Rights Act does not give the courts unlimited power. They cannot set legislation aside. Indeed, there are no more human rights than there were before the 1998 Act came into force. The Human Rights Act is too weak to be concerned about.

JAMES A. GRANT
Glasgow

Explore Letters

• Feedback