THE Human Rights Act (HRA) was introduced in 1998 as one of the first major reforms of the new Labour Government.
It incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into British law and requires public bodies such as the police, local councils and the NHS to abide by them.
In practice this means that if you have a complaint under HR law you do not have seek redress in European courts, but can use UK ones. The Tories want to replace the HRA with a British Bill of Rights and Michael Gove is expected to bring forward his plans for that later this year.
It is fitting that First Minister Nicola Sturgeon chose the Pearce Institute in Glasgow to launch an attack on the Government’s move. The PI – as it is known – has been a fixture since 1906 as home to a range of community and civic groups with a common aim of meeting the needs of the people of Govan.
Sturgeon was joined by human rights campaigner and Liberty director Shami Chakrabarti when she told her audience that human rights was a devolved issue and any attempt to amend it would require the legislative consent of the Scottish Parliament.
However, given that the ECHR was embedded in the devolution settlement, it was “inconceivable” that Holyrood would give its consent to abandoning it.
The Tories deny they want to scrap human rights law and say their Bill of Rights will improve and modernise the HRA and “restore common sense” to its applications.
What that means in practice is the continued subjugation of society’s weaker elements, and in this we would include the poor, the sick, carers, workers and unions – in short any sector of society that disagrees with their strategies.
We believe that type of Scotland would be anathema to the people who live here, who cherish their traits of fairness, compassion and more.
Gove said Scotland could keep the HRA even if it were scrapped in the rest of the UK, but we say such folly would diminish the UK – and our part in it – in the eyes of the rest of the world.
Sturgeon tells Westminster: We’ll never agree to scrapping Human Rights Act
Letters to The National, September 24: 56 MPs are fighting for our human rights
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here