Human Rights Act 1998: Meaning (information, definition, explanation, facts)

The Human Rights Act 1998 is a British Act of Parliament enacting parts of the European Convention on Human Rights into, and force compatibility with, British law, which received Royal Assent on November 9, 1998, and came into force on October 1, 2000.

In particular, the Act made it illegal for any public body to create rules incompatible with that Convention. The passing of the Act gave the ability to Britons who believe their rights have been violated to defend their right in a British court. Previously they would have had to resort to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Under the Act, this option still remains, as a last-resort.

Jurisdiction

The Human Rights Act applies to the United Kingdom government. Stronger provisions exist for the devolved Scottish administration under the Scotland Act 1998, which provides that the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Parliament have no power to do anything contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights.

The act specifies that an individual "victim", not a pressure group or similar organisation, must bring a case to court. The power passed to the court under the act takes two forms

Fault in primary legislation: If a case is brought and a piece of "primary legislation", i.e. an Act of Parliament, is found to be in conflict with the convention then the court issues a "declaration of incompatibility". The law in question is not immediately struck off the statue books, but ministers are given an opportunity to amend or revoke the law in Parliament. If ministers fail to take such remedial action, the complainant may take the case to the European Court, which has the authority to force a change in the law.

Fault in secondary legislation: If an incompatibilty is found between the convention and rules and regulations drawn up by public bodies but outside Parliament (e.g. Health and Safety rules drawn up by a particular Ministry) then the court has the right to strike off the offending legislation, provided doing so does not conflict with any primary legislation.

For a summary of the rights actually recognised under the law, see the European Convention on Human Rights article.

The first case invoking the act was brought by The Times in October 2000 which sought to overturn a libel ruling against the newspaper involving the Lee Clegg murder case.

Naomi Campbell and Sara Cox both sought to assert their right to privacy under the act. Both cases were successful for the complainant (Campbell's on the second attempt) and an amendment to British to provision for privacy is expected to be introduced.

The James Bulger murder case tested whether it was right for the Home Secretary, a politician, was the right person to have the final say on the length of life sentences, or whether this infringed the perpertrators' right to a fair trial. The European Court found on the side of Bulger's killers Jon Venables and Robert Thompson. The 2003 Criminal Justice Act removed much of the power to set sentences previously held by the Home Secretary.