We

can depend upon our elected representatives to protect our human rights, we do not need the
Human Rights Act of 1998.
Written by Rebekah Peddle (Nov 2010)
Human rights are rights which apply to all human beings, no matter where they come from, their
nationality, gender, sexuality, language or colour, and so on. When it comes to human rights, all
individuals are seen as equal. The Human Rights Act of 1998 gives legal effect in the UK to particular
basic rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).These rights can vary
from very basic, for example the freedom of speech, the right to vote & the right to a basic standard
of housing to matters that could even affect an individuals life such as freedom from torture or
killing and the right to life.
Representative democracy is a form of government which is founded upon the rule that individuals
can vote to elect someone to represent them, in many cases this is voting for an MP or a local
counsellors. The representative will then form an independent ruling body, which leads to that
certain representative having both the responsibility and power to act according to peoples interest
although sometimes they cannot please everyones wishes as there always be differing opinions and
beliefs on some matters. Also, if a member(s) of the public has a problem, the MP/local counsellor
may not always want to hear what they have to say as they are only the minority which is therefore
different to the Human Rights Act of 1998 because in the eyes of that particular act, all individuals
are the same, no matter what.
As stated above, the sole purpose of the Human Rights Act of 1998 is to incorporate the Europeans
Convention on Human Rights into UK law.
(The European Convention on Human Rights was created just after the Second World War when it
was realised that one of the causes of the war was the way in which the Nazi Government of
Germany had both abused and violated the human rights of the Jewish people. In the aftermath of
these incidents, countries such as Rome and the UK signed an agreement that would give the basic
rights set out in a convention to each and every one of their citizens. This agreement became known
as the European Convention on Human Rights and at present has been signed by all 45 of the
European states.)
The Human Rights Act gives the right of allowing UK citizens and organisations to go to court or seek
a tribunal if they believe that those rights that have been granted to them have been violated by the
Government and/or public authorities. These public authorities can also include local authorities and
organisations such as the police and the NHS for example. It then extends to any organisation that
provides a statutory duty (that gives a service); these can include schools and bus & railway
companies for example.

There are many different advantages and disadvantages of the Human Rights Act. Advantages
include that the Act avoids any conflict between domestic and international law, it has been made to
become both easier and cheaper to enforce an individuals rights under the convention and that the
remedies that an individual who puts in a successful claim can now get are for more suitable of those
of usual remedies as it is very likely that the courts have been given other cases and tribunals about

Rebekah Peddle

the same topic of others who have had their human rights infringed. The biggest advantage of this
Act is that it leads to better policy outcomes by ensuring all needs of the UKs citizens are met.
On the other hand, there are also disadvantages when it comes to the Human Rights Act. These can
include; that it possibly gives too much power to judges as there are great amounts of individuals
who are taking these authorities to court, the HRA seems to be only be imposed upon the
Government and public authorities not against limited companies or individuals and that the Act in
general is not very well established and could actually be appealed against at Parliament at any given
time.
At present the Human Rights Act protects a large number of rights from the European Convention on
Human Rights. Just some of these include;
The right to life

The right not to be tortured or inhumanly or degradingly treated or punished

The right to a fair trial (and to a range of other associated things, such as the free assistance
of an interpreter if one cannot understand the language in a trial situation)

The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion

The right to freedom of expression, freedom to hold opinions and freedom to receive and
impart information

The right to freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association with others

Protocol 1, Article 1- the right to peaceful enjoyment of one's possessions

Protocol 1, Article 2- the right to education

Protocol 1, Article 3- the right to free and secret elections at reasonable intervals.

The right that is not to be tortured or inhumanly or degradingly treated or punished is known as an
absolute right to which there are no exceptions. However, all the other rights are somewhat
qualified in certain situations, for example the breach of the right to life is legal a such if a death
results from the use of force which was necessary when making a lawful arrest and could save the
lives of others. Other rights can also be restricted in some ways such as the freedom of peaceful
assembly which is not possible if it puts an individuals safety in danger.
Some rights in the list above do not offer protection but are rights that will give better quality of life
to individuals such as the right to education which would give these people a much improved start in
life by getting the education that they are entitled to so that in the future they go on to get places in
University or a well-paid job etc.
Rights such as the freedom of expression and freedom to hold opinions and freedom of religion
are also important as nowadays everyone has different opinions and beliefs on whatever matter it
may be and everyone deserved to have their opinions heard. The freedom of religion is just as vital
as we live in such a multi-cultural and diverse society, that everyone is likely to have their own
thoughts on this too and should be allowed to follow their own religion as long as they dont try and
force it upon others.

In conclusion, I feel that we can depend more on the Human Rights Act of 1998 more than our
elected representatives as all individuals have the chance to take their case to court with the HRA no
matter how small or big of a case it may be, because all citizens are entitled to this as part of the
legislation. However, the same cannot be said for all elected representatives who may not look into
Rebekah Peddle

what problems these individuals have although because they have been specifically elected. The
Human Rights Act it far more reliable.

Rebekah Peddle