Seven UK QCs appointed to Govt commission to look into case for British Bill of Rights
A heavyweight group of QCs has been pulled together by the Government to investigate the case for a UK Bill of Rights and look at reforming the European Court of Human Rights in the wake of a number of controversial European rulings. Seven QCs were appointed to the nine-member commission of human rights experts, launched last week (18 March) by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke.
March 22, 2011 at 03:32 AM
5 minute read
Govt puts together human rights commission for possible UK Bill of Rights to protect civil liberties
A heavyweight group of QCs has been pulled together by the Government to investigate the case for a UK Bill of Rights and look at reforming the European Court of Human Rights in the wake of a number of controversial European rulings.
Seven QCs were appointed to the nine-member commission of human rights experts, launched last week (18 March) by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke.
The commission, which will be chaired by former permanent secretary at the Department of Work and Pensions Sir Leigh Lewis, will look at whether it is necessary to create a Bill of Rights to protect civil liberties in the UK while ensuring that obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) are met under UK law.
With the UK set to take over as chair of the Council of Europe this November, the commission will also look at reforming the European Court of Human Rights, with a final report due by the end of 2012. An advisory panel will also be established to offer guidance in relation to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Withdrawing from the ECHR will not be an option, despite criticism within the UK of both the Convention and the Court of Human Rights. This follows a number of controversial rulings from the Court, including the recent decision that serving prisoners should be given the right to vote.
The new commission comprises Jonathan Fisher QC of Devereux Chambers, Martin Howe QC from 8 New Square, Blackstone Chambers' Anthony Lester QC, Doughty Street Chambers' Baroness Helena Kennedy QC (pictured) and 4 Pump Court's Anthony Speaight QC.
Philippe Sands QC from Matrix Chambers, Blackstone Chambers' Sir David Edward QC and president of the International Political Science Association's research committee on political finance and political corruption Michael Pinto-Duschinsky have also been appointed to the panel.
Fisher said: "This is a very important step as I believe there is a perception that the implementation of the Human Rights Act hasn't gone particularly well and there is a lack of confidence in it. It is absolutely vital that we get it right if we are to enact a modern Bill of Rights and this would lead to changes in English law if it goes through.
"It is also important to appreciate that this is something which affects everybody. I've never believed in there being a specialist human rights Bar – human rights is an integral part of all types of legal practice. Every lawyer needs to know about the subject and be familiar with it."
The new commission has already come in for criticism, with some claiming that it is unlikely to achieve anything, as the line-up is strongly divided between those that are pro and anti-Europe. In addition, lawyers have questioned the scope for substantial reform – particularly as the boundaries of the commission's investigation mean the UK will still have to comply with the ECHR and European Court of Human Rights' rulings.
Herbert Smith's head of advocacy, Murray Rosen QC, said: "The ECHR has fermented controversy for decades and it is no bad thing to air the debate between legal experts again -but I have to say that both the arguments and opposing lawyer line-ups seem to me heavily weighted in favour of the present Europe-wide approach to human rights."
Fountain Court's Francis Jacobs QC added: "The ECHR contains rights derived from English law, and UK lawyers played a large part in its drafting. It would not be sensible to have two Bills of Rights, and the ECHR is binding on the UK in any event.
"The idea of a UK Bill of Rights would make sense only if the UK wanted to denounce the ECHR – which would entail withdrawal from the Council of Europe and probably from the European Union. To denounce the Convention should be an unthinkable idea."
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer litigation partner, Paul Lomas, said: "A UK Bill of Rights has been long threatened but is very unnecessary. Rights are human rights not British rights. If the UK sets up its own separate Bill of (presumably lesser) Rights it will undermine the ECHR that is already in place – a convention heavily shaped by English principle and English lawyers.
"The development of the decisions and processes of the ECHR to be more consistent with national courts and expectations might be a good idea, but there is no need to disengage from the international structure and go independent."
Manjit Gill QC from No.5 Chambers, said: "A UK Bill of Rights may complete the aim of 'Bringing Rights Home', which is something the Human Rights Act intended to do; this would be a good thing.
"There are also a number of specific matters which the commission ought to look. For instance, one of the biggest problems with the current position is that when a court declares the law to be incompatible with human rights, it cannot force the government to modify the law."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWalmart Ordered to End ‘Abusive Practices’ By Mexican Antitrust Authority
O'Melveny Secures Global Clearances as Korean Air-Asiana Merger is Finally Completed
Big Law Firms Help Vodafone-Three Merger Clear Major Competition Hurdle
Canada’s Antitrust Watchdog Sues Google For Billions Over Ad Practices
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250