Human Writes: Special Anniversary Edition! by The British Institute of Human Rights

HumanWrites THE POWER OF THE PEN FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE UK

SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION

PAGE 2

People power can protect what protects us all, our Human Rights Act

he Human Rights Act can be saved if enough people say no to the Government’s plans to repeal it, according to the British Institute of Human Rights (BIHR). BIHR is one of many voices making the case for retaining the Human Rights Act in the face of the Government’s consultation on a British Bill of Rights. It is calling on people to back its campaign by standing Together for Human Rights. The Human Rights Act is the law which protects people in the UK against the Government and public officials when they over step the mark or fail to meet their responsibilities. This could be helping victims of sexual violence get justice for failures in police investigations, protecting older people, or stopping drastic cuts to care packages for disabled people. And, because of the legal duty placed on them by the Human Rights Act, hospitals, local councils, housing associations and care homes are proactively working with BIHR to deliver public services that respect people’s basic human rights. The Government has a slim majority in the House of Commons and plans to move forward with its manifesto commitment to “scrap” the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights. Government

signals to date point to a substantial weakening of current protections from “scrapping” the current law, to curtailing the role of the European Court of Human Rights. Stephen Bowen, Director of BIHR, says: “The debate to date has not been informed by an understanding of the ‘basics’ of human rights: what they are, who they are for, and how they relate to all of our lives in Britain today. We need to inform the debate, to tell the stories of those individuals whose lives have not just been touched by the Human Rights Act but transformed by it and to highlight the countless others who have been protected because of the legal duty placed upon the state to respect their rights. “We must tell these stories and so too must the people at the heart of them. There are many voices defending the Human Rights Act but the fact that they have needed its protection in the past or fear that they may do so in the future means they are not generally powerful voices. We have to ensure that these voices are no longer drowned out by spurious arguments and political opportunism.”

To stand Together for Human Rights with BIHR go: www.bihr.org.uk/together

Ever read a headline about human rights and wondered if there was more to the story? Let Human Writes – the newspaper of The British Institute of Human Rights bring you the facts

The rights stuff Stop and search, corporal punishment, safe housing for young people who’ve been abused – find out why these are all human rights issues with our quick guide to some seminal UK human rights stories.

PAGE 3

Are you a human rights friend or foe? Our Human Rights Act protects all of us in our day-to-day interactions with public officials. Take a look at what this means in practice with our ‘human rights friend or foe’ quiz, and find out where you stand!

PAGE 5

Who dares wins When three soldiers died after an arduous SAS selection exercise in Wales, our Human Rights Act was instrumental in their families’ battle to find out how their sons lost their lives…

PAGE 7

Human rights saved Steven’s life One father’s story of how the Human Rights Act helped bring home his disabled son, after almost a year of unlawful detention by social services.

PAGES 14-15

We answer your questions and concerns about human rights What’s going on with prisoner voting? Why can foreign criminals use their human rights to stay in the UK? What about my human rights? Join us in exploring some prejudices, preconceptions and human rights FAQs.

The rights stuff

Your quick guide to some key human rights stories in the UK

End of the birch Authorities on the Isl e of Man birched or caned young offen ders until a 15-yearold took his case to the European Court of Human Rig hts in 1978. He and his friends had a fight with an older pupil who reported them for bringing beer into school an d were sentenced to three strokes of the birch rod. The institutionalised vio lence, long wait an d formality of the punis hment, along with the indignity of being whipped on the bare bottom, amou nted to degrading treatment and so wa s a breach of Article 3 of the European Convention.

Stop and Search d searched ere stopped an w le op pe o Tw r way to powers on thei under terrorism was told otest. The first an arms fair pr around and t of protesters there were a lo the second, e trouble, and he might caus filming. as told to stop a journalist, w ers were so w d that the po The court foun ards to gu fe adequate sa wide, without were not ey th at isuse, th prevent their m therefore with law’ and e, ‘in accordance t for private lif right to respec t. Ac s breached the ht ig R in the Human under Article 8

CCTV reaches the bedroom lities, learning disabi A couple with ing be e er w s ing skill whose parent at a social services assessed by ressed to ntre, were dist residential ce l the rooms, meras on in al find CCTV ca en though r bedroom, ev including thei rate se slept in a pa their new baby neighbour r ei th the help of nursery. With ation ed BIHR educ who’d attend w the ho d ne explai sessions, they vaded their eir bedroom in cameras in th e (Article t for private lif right to respec e social ). Rights Act Th 8 in the Human off the h itc sw agreed to am te es ic rv se e couple ght to give th cameras at ni privacy.

Right to a voice trauma nced significant Paul had experie ars. ye 14 er ugh for ov in his home boro ed olv inv s wa ere and He felt unsafe th ed us ho re be to e t battl in a lengthy cour a when he attended somewhere else BIHR. ent project run by youth empowerm t for ec sp re had a right to Paul realised he his g tin ec ot included pr private life which 8 cle rti (A g ein tal wellb physical and men is th to ks an Th ts Act). in the Human Righ th ing is. confident vocalis project, Paul felt at his urt explaining th He wrote to the co been d r private life ha right to respect fo tive ga ne cause of the interfered with be ere wh ea ar to stay in an impact of having ing us ho en ul was giv he felt unsafe. Pa it felt safe. For Paul, he e er wh in an area e m now had a safe ho wasn’t just that he e th d nt, but that he ha that was importa in the d ar he be d an say ability to have a process. decision-making

McLibel In the 1980s, Greenpeace activists were handing out a leaflet entitled “What’s wrong with McDonalds.” McDonalds hired investigators to find them and then sued for libel. The activists were refused legal aid and largely represented themselves. This case became the longest in English legal history, taking more than ten years for the Court of Appeal to decide that McDonalds were within their right to claim libel. The Court of Appeal awarded McDonalds over £70,000 in compensation. The activists were refused the right to appeal the decision. But in 2005, the activists went to the European Court of Human Rights. They argued they did not have access to a fair trial (Article 6) because they were denied legal aid. They also argued that the decision of the UK court interfered with their right to freedom of expression (Article 10). The European Court of Human Rights agreed and said that “the inequality of arms could not have been greater.”

2 HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION

Do Not Resuscitate The family of a 51-ye ar-old man with Down’s syndrome were surprised to discover a ‘Do Not Resuscitate’ order on his medical notes when he returned to his residential ho me after a spell in hospital. The reaso ns were listed as “Down’s syndrome, unable to swallow... bed bound, learning difficulties” but the family, despite visitin g him, had been completely unaware of the order. The man sought legal ad vice, and argued this was a breach of the right to life and discrimination (Artic les 2 and 14 in the Human Rights Act). The hospital settled out of court.

3. Do you think that when you receive healthcare you should be protected from degrading treatment?

YES

4. Do you think the government should be prevented from tapping your phone without a good reason? YES NO

9. Do you think the authorities should have a duty to protect people from being trafficked? YES NO

5. Do you think victims of crime should be able to hold the police to account for failing to investigate criminals? YES NO

10. Do you think you should be able to ask UK judges to decide whether your human rights have been breached rather than having to go to the European Court of Human Rights? YES NO

6. Do you think disabled children should be exempt from the bedroom tax / spare room subsidy? YES NO

If you answered yes to any of these questions then you’re probably a human rights friend because this is what the Human Rights Act is all about!

This is what the right to be free from inhuman and degrading treatment protects against (Article 3, Human Rights Act).

This is what the Human Rights Act does. Section 6 means all public authorities have a legal duty to respect and protect your human rights.

Freedom of the press is protected by the right to freedom of expression (Article 10) and the Human Rights Act has a special provision in section 12 which says our courts must have particular regard to the importance of this right when deciding cases, including those involving the media.

This is what the right to be free from slavery and forced labour protects against (Article 4, Human Rights Act). This is what the right to respect for private and family life protects (Article 8, Human Rights Act).

This is what the right to respect for private life protects (Article 8, HRA) and in some cases the right to life (Article 2, Human Rights Act).

7. 6.

This is what the right to respect for private and family life protects (Article 8, Human Rights Act).

Answers

Poole Borough Co uncil used anti-terror powers to place the Paton family under surveillance to chec k they were living in the catchment area of the school their children had applied to attend. The Investigatory Powe rs Tribunal found the Council’s use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powe rs Act 2000 (RIPA) had been disproportiona te, and so breache d the family’s right to privacy and family life under Article 8 in the Human Rights Act.

YES

10. This is what the Human Rights Act does; it means that people’s first port of call now is the UK courts rather than having to go to the European Court straight off.

Spying on school children

8. Do you think older people living in care homes should have a say when decisions are made to close their homes and relocate them to other places miles away from their families? YES NO

This is what the right to respect for private life protects (Article 8, Human Rights Act).

least 400 and 2008, at Between 2005 200 people 1, as many as lly ia nt te po and rd Hospital. arily at Staffo ss ce ne un ed di people who ily members of m fa 97 e om S at the poor ght claims th had died brou ived caused r relatives rece treatment thei d that the eir deaths, an or hastened th inhuman suffered was treatment they ibited under oh which is pr g, in ad gr de and s Act. Mid Human Right e th in 3 le ic Art ttled these NHS Trust se ire sh rd ffo ta S court. claims out of

2. Do you think there should be a law in the UK that allows you to hold public services to account for failing to respect your rights?

7. Do you think doctors should have to speak to you or your family before putting a ‘Do Not Resuscitate’ order on your medical file? YES NO

Mid Staffs – human rights abuses

1. Do you think you should be able to read an opinionated newspaper? YES NO

Dianne Blo od was not able to regis her decease ter d husband as the fathe of her two c r hildren con ceived by IV because of F provisions in the Hum Fertilisation an & Embryolo gy Act 199 When she c 0. hallenged th is, the court ruled that th e law did n ot respect Dianne’s ch ildren’s righ t to respect private and for family life (A rticle 8 in th Human Rig e hts Act). Pa rliament the introduced n changes to the law wh respected h ich uman rights .

Are you a human rights friend or foe?

This is what the right to be free from inhuman and degrading treatment protects (Article 3, Human Rights Act).

Naming dad on birth certificate

HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION 3

Take away one bit and the whole thing starts to fall apart. E IF L Y IL M A F T C E P S E R O T T H THE RIG D E T A C U D E E B O T T H IG R E H T Y IT R U C E S D N A Y T R E IB L O T THE RIGHT EEDOM FROM SLAVERY THE RIGHT TO FRT TO A FAIR TRIAL THE RIGH OM OF THOUGHT THE RIGHT TO FCREEEADND RELIGION CONSCIEN O MARRY THE RIGHT T N OF PROPERTY THE RIGHT TO PRTHOETERICTGHIOT TO FREE EXPRESSION THE RIGHT TO FREE ELECTIONS

The Human Rights Act is our bill of rights. This means itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a law for us all, setting the rules for public officials to respect everything from your right to education and privacy, to think and say what you believe and be protected from degrading treatment. Freedoms so easily taken for granted here at home. Yet, our Government are planning to take the Human Rights Act apart and replace the protections we all share with people the world over with their own watered down version. It is the job of governments to respect, protect and fulfil our human rights, not to chip away at the protections they owe us all. The pursuit of this so-called Bill of Rights is calling human rights themselves into question. Your Human Rights Act is important because it is about the rights everyone has, not those the government chooses to gift us. Every day it helps people live with dignity. Every day it keeps those with power in check. Every day it makes our democracy work. Are you content to stand on the sidelines and watch it collapse? Act now and protect what protects us all: our Human Rights Act.

Visit www.bihr.org.uk/together Get informed. Get active. Get heard.

4 HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION

Human rights in the news

Who dares wins

ny soldier seeking to join the SAS would know that if accepted for the elite regiment they might one day have to lay down their lives in the course of their duty. Their families, like the families of any soldiers, would understand the risks. But how many could imagine this happening, not on a dangerous and secret mission far from home, but in the Brecon Beacons of Wales? How many could imagine it happening before they had even been accepted for the world-famous Special Forces regiment? In July 2013, three soldiers on an arduous SAS selection exercise collapsed in 30 degree heat. Two of them, Trooper Eddie Maher and Lance Corporal Craig John

Roberts, died that day. The third, Corporal James Dunsby, died 17 days later.

“

The Coroner and the Ministry of Defence agreed that the soldiers’ right to life (protected by Article 2 in the Human Rights Act) meant that a full inquiry must be held on whether their deaths could have been prevented.

So it was that the SAS, motto “Who Dares Wins”, found itself the subject of an in-depth investigation, looking at how the three men had come to lose their lives that day. To date, there has been no criminal prosecution, but due to the Human Rights Act the regiment was ordered to examine how it conducts its selection exercises, and further proceedings may arise in the future.

...the Human Rights Act gave families a voice when their sons died during training in Wales...

”

HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION 5

Human rights in the news 91-year-old falsely imprisoned

ssex County Council has paid a 91-year-old man with dementia £60,000 in damages for false imprisonment after taking him from his home and holding him in a locked unit for 17 months. The Council acted after friends of the man contacted them to report suspected financial abuse and express concerns about the man’s ability to look after himself. He lived alone in his house with his cat, Fluffy, despite also having other health problems.

Mother goes missing R

eturning home from the shops a 31-year-old man was alarmed to find his 81-year-old mother missing. She had recently developed dementia and he had been caring for her with the help of the local authority. He contacted local agencies but no one could say where she was. The Council had her, but they didn’t tell him for 19 days. Milton Keynes Council had taken his mother away to a nursing home when social workers became concerned about some injuries which his mother was unable to explain. The Council restricted contact between the 81-year-old former magistrate and her son and would not allow them to meet unsupervised. But the Council had not investigated its safeguarding concerns for the woman, named in court simply as “RR”. Social

workers did not have authorisation to remove the woman and the case went to court in 2014 under the Human Rights Act. District Judge Mort ruled: “There can be no excuse for Milton Keynes Council’s initial failure to investigate the safeguarding alerts. The way they have dealt with this case has been woefully inadequate from the start. It has resulted in avoidable and unlawful interference in respect of RR’s Article 5 right to liberty and security of person and her Article 8 right to respect for her private and family life and her home.” RR remained in the nursing home but Milton Keynes Council agreed to fund the reasonable costs of providing adapted transport to allow contact between RR and her son, who agreed to take a manual handling course so he would be better able to assist his mother.

6 HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION

Although the Council recorded the man, identified in court simply as “P”, as having gone voluntarily he was clearly reluctant to do so, and distressed. Facts are disputed but he is said to have been wearing his dressing gown at the time, without trousers or pyjama bottoms. The court ruled that Essex County Council’s treatment of P amounted to breaches of his rights to liberty and to respect for private and family life under Articles 5 and 8 of the Human Rights Act. These breaches were said to be made worse because P would otherwise have continued to live at home with support. He eventually did return home with Fluffy, with 24-hour support from carers, and is reportedly happy and contented.

Human rights in the news

Justice for rape survivors I

n 2009 London taxi driver John Worboys was convicted of multiple rapes of women passengers who placed their trust in him. It was later revealed that many would not have been raped at all had police done their job properly. The Human Rights Act was used to pinpoint their failings. “DSD”, as she was identified in court, was going home from a night out with friends in 2003 when she got into a black cab. The driver told her he had just won a large amount of money on the lottery, and showed her a bag full of money he had on the front seat. He asked her to have a drink with him to celebrate. DSD was uncertain but he was insistent and she drank the champagne he gave her. The next thing she remembered was waking up in hospital. DSD became convinced she had been raped and went to report the attack to the police, only to find that the taxi driver had dropped her off at the police station the previous night. The police believed she was on drugs and had her admitted to the hospital.

Incredibly, nobody had taken the taxi driver’s details and, after a few months, DSD’s case was closed.

including the attack on NBV. He is further believed to have assaulted DSD and over a hundred other women.

In 2007, “NBV” got into the same cab and was told the same story of a lottery win. She did not accept the drink and her last memory is of the taxi driver forcing her to take a pill. When NBV reported the attack to the police they were able to get the registration plate from CCTV footage of the taxi dropping NBV off. They even identified the driver, John Worboys, and he was arrested.

The judge, Mr Justice Penry-Davey, said police had a proactive duty to investigate serious crimes. He found that systemic failures throughout the police investigation breached the duty to investigate and that, but for those failures, NBV would not have been raped at all. Both DSD and NBV had not been supported or believed and their rights under Article 3 in the Human Rights Act not to suffer inhuman or degrading treatment had been breached.

However, police later released Worboys without searching his house and, like DSD, NBV found her case abandoned. In 2008, a routine computer check linked four similar rape allegations. John Worboys was arrested, and this time his house was searched. Police found his ‘rape kit’ and evidence tying him to multiple victims. Worboys was jailed indefinitely in 2009, having been convicted of 19 charges of drugging and sexually assaulting 12 women,

The then Deputy Commissioner John Yates wrote in the Guardian that the problems the force faced over its handling of rape cases had echoes of those that emerged after the racist murder of the teenager Stephen Lawrence. “We need … to reinvent our response in the way that we did in relation to homicide after the tragic murder of Stephen Lawrence,” he said.

HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION 7

People “We’re all human. It’s as simple as that.” Karen Chandler, the Project Coordinator for Pembrokeshire People First, a learning disability support organisation in Wales, talks about her organisation’s focus on human rights. “Pembrokeshire People First has been involved with BIHR for several years, since we undertook a major project focussing on the Human Rights Act with our groups of adults with learning disabilities. What was striking was how passionately our members felt about the Act – both the individual rights which spoke to them about equality and dignity, and the

very name of the Act – one in which they were explicitly included as humans. You would be amazed how rare this is. “As Project Coordinator, my role is to carry out the remit our members give me and they tell me – as part of the manifesto they develop every two years – to focus on human rights, and to campaign to keep the Human Rights Act. “When the consultation around a proposed Bill of Rights was published in 2012, my members told me they wanted to contribute. This was no easy task – the consultation was nearly impenetrable, and when the Commission on a Bill of Rights provided us with an easy-read version, the file was so big it could not be delivered electronically! However, my members were determined to contribute, and spent a whole day working through the consultation, clearly and repeatedly stating that they wanted to keep the Human Rights Act, and the

protections it afforded them and other vulnerable people. “When the Commission published its findings, my members were delighted that two of the Commissioners refused to sign up to a Bill of Rights as they felt the submissions, of which ours were to our knowledge the only ones submitted directly by people with learning disabilities, made a strong case for the retention of the Act. “My members are quite cynical – experience has taught them that – and truthfully they expected that their hard work would just be part of a rubber-stamping exercise. To be told, explicitly, that their voices had been listened to was empowering and very moving, and redoubled their determination to protect the Act, and everyone’s human rights. As one of them said: we’re all human. It’s as simple as that.”

“In their hearts, local people not only understand the ethos of the Human Rights Act and the values that underpin it but also have a keen sense of the consequences when human rights are not respected. By being active on human rights we can all play a part in making sure that the communities we live in are supportive and protect the most vulnerable.” “Local newspapers and a number of local politicians were openly criticising the Human Rights Act. We started doing surveys in the county to try and find out what local people really thought. We found that 80% of people locally think that human rights are either quite relevant or extremely relevant. “As a result, our organisation decided to run its own local Human Rights Week in 2013. We ran events that highlighted the role of Muslim women in human rights, we ran hate incident reporting training and supported and promoted an event with Professor Bill Bowring on the European Court of Human Rights. We made BIHR human rights bunting as an activity at most of the events to try and encourage creativity in promoting human rights and to engage with people of all ages. “In 2014, we also started work on looking at the experiences of young people who were being stopped and searched by the police. We undertook another survey and ran local focus groups and found that of the 120 people we spoke to, 67 (56%) had been stopped and searched (see panel for full results). “We used this information to talk to the local

media, who were particularly concerned at the lack of written records given to people who had been stopped and searched. We engaged with the local police service and suggested they have training from local young people about the impact of stop and search on individuals. This is due to be piloted soon and we are confident that it will have a positive impact on both the numbers of stop searches taking place but also on the quality of the experiences of those being stopped and searched. “In addition to this we were actively involved in the BIHR #March4HumanRights campaign. As a small organisation we are keen on using social media as it is an effective way of spreading a message. Using selfies for

8 HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION

people to show their support for human rights and the Human Rights Act was an idea that all the people we spoke to understood and with only a couple of exceptions everyone we spoke to agreed to get involved. We got 34 selfies from local people and public officials just by asking!”

Anjona Roy has been Chief Executive of Northamptonshire Rights & Equality Council since 2004. In 2011, the directors decided to make a change to the core business of the organisation to include an aim of “Promoting a Culture that promotes and understands Human Rights in Northamptonshire”.

People

“

The Human Rights Act saved Steven’s life. If we hadn’t used the Act to challenge the decisions about his care, Steven would have faced a life in public care he didn’t want or need and he would now be living with only Skype contact with me. It’s a horrendous thought.

”

Mark Neary, father of Steven, who has autism and a severe learning disability, tells his story. “Back in 2009, when Steven was 21, we had just moved into a new flat in London when I became ill with the flu. To allow me to recover, I organised for Steven to go into respite care for a few days. He already had respite at that unit once a fortnight so was comfortable with this arrangement.

Stop and Search Survey Northamptonshire Rights and Equality Council found that of the 120 people, 67 (56%) had been stopped and searched, and of this group:

(27%)

had been stopped and searched once.

(46%)

had been stopped and searched between two and five times.

(9%)

had been stopped and searched between six and ten times.

(18%)

had been stopped and searched more than 10 times.

In addition:

stated that the officer who stopped and searched them did not identify them self.

said they were not given a written record or advised when and where they could obtain one, which could make such stops and searches unlawful.

of did not feel that the police had reasonable grounds to stop and search them.

did not feel that they were treated with respect by the officer.

Of the whole group of 120 individuals:

(55%) saw Northamptonshire Police’s use of stop and search powers as counterproductive or very counterproductive.

(64%)

disagreed that Northamptonshire Police’s use of "without reasonable grounds" stop and search powers balances public protection with individuals’ freedoms.

(62%) saw it as decreasing confidence in the police.

(80%) viewed Northamptonshire Police’s use of its powers as rarely or never based on reasonable grounds for suspicion.

“The next day I got a call from the social worker telling me that Steven had had a difficult night and they needed to keep him in for longer but the bed was no longer available there so they moved him to a different unit. I was still feeling poorly so I agreed to this arrangement as it was only for a couple of weeks. But it wasn’t until a year later that Steven was returned home. “The social worker proposed Steven stay longer as his behaviour had deteriorated but there was no recognition that the unexpected move and prolonged stay was causing this. They didn’t believe me when I told them that Steven was not like that at home. Without meeting with me, a psychiatrist decided that I was not coping with Steven at home. The team then made a ‘Deprivation of Liberty’ authorisation to keep Steven in the unit. When I tried to challenge this, a friend and I were met with a nine member team at the unit who were not budging on this decision. I later received a letter telling me that Steven would not be returned home and that they were looking for a long-term placement for him in Wales. “It hadn’t occurred to me to use human rights to challenge these decisions but when Steven escaped from the unit for the third time he was appointed an Independent Mental Capacity Advocate. She was fantastic. Our story was also getting a lot of media attention by this point and a blogger got in touch; she and Steven’s advocate helped me to get a lawyer. We made a legal challenge, with Steven’s interests represented by the Official Solicitor, who was the first person to raise the fact that mine and Steven’s right to family life had been interfered with by these decisions. This was the turning point and for me was the essence of the whole case; what was Steven doing there when he should be at home with me? It was so basic. “The court decided that Steven’s right to liberty (protected by Article 5 in the Human Rights Act) had been breached and that mine and Steven’s right to family life (Article 8) had also been breached. The outcome for us was in some ways brilliant – Steven was returned home – but Steven was and remains very traumatised by how he was treated that year. Even now, whenever I seem to be getting ill he gets very worried that he will be taken away. He may never get over that. “But as a result of the case I’ve been asked to speak at lots of events and share our story, and people still get in touch today to say they are in a similar situation and our case helps them to challenge this. I’m very proud that we are able to help others. There is such a power imbalance in these situations and people don’t realise how fundamental the right to family life is; it was a real eye-opener for me. It is also a sad indictment that someone with learning disabilities is not assumed to have a right to family life and a home and has to jump through so many hoops to get this right respected.”

HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION 9

5 Minute Interview

How has the European Court of Human Rights influenced UK law?

The judgments of the Court have had a considerable influence on UK law in a wide variety of fields. The age of consent for same-sex couples, the right of transsexual people to have their change of gender recognised and to marry, the use of corporal punishment in schools, the detention of life prisoners after the expiry of their ‘tariffs’, the interception or tapping of communications and the retention of DNA samples from people acquitted of an offence and courts martial system, are just a few examples of cases where a finding of the Court has led the UK authorities to introduce changes in the law to better protect the fundamental rights of individuals.

How does the Court work with the UK courts?

The number of times that the Court has disagreed with the UK courts is very small. The dialogue between the courts, which has taken place through their judgments and through meetings between judges of the respective courts, has cemented the strong relationship between the national and international tribunals. Sadly, this has too often been unrecognised – as the President of the UK’s Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger, said, almost every time the European Court does disagree with the national courts it gets headlines; where it agrees, it does not hit the press.

How efficient is the European Court of Human Rights?

Contrary to the popular myth, the Court is highly efficient. As a Court open to 820 million people, from 47 different legal jurisdictions and with 39 different languages, it is hardly surprising that the Court has a very large number of pending cases. But, by way of a recent example, in 2014 the Court decided over 86,000 cases, far in excess of any other tribunal in the world, national or international.

Sir Nicolas Bratza former President of the European Court of Human Rights, now Chair of BIHR

How often does the UK Government win or lose cases at the Court?

There are some particularly toxic myths around this, myths which stem from the deliberate exclusion from the quoted statistics of the many thousands of cases against the UK which are declared inadmissible or struck from the Court’s list. The reality is that, in 2014, some 98.6% of cases brought against the UK were declared inadmissible; a far higher number than in any state of comparable size. Of the admissible cases, only 0.6% resulted in a finding of a violation of human rights. Thus, in the vast majority of cases brought against the UK, the Court either agrees that the Government has no case to answer or delivers a judgment in favour of the Government. (See stats opposite)

How would scrapping the Human Rights Act impact on the protection of human rights across Europe?

Legally, as long as the UK remains a party to the European Convention on Human Rights, individuals in this country may still apply to the Court to protect their fundamental rights. However, those rights are primarily intended

10 HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION

to be protected at home, within each country, and resort to the European Court should be the exception. It should only be necessary where the national authorities fail in their obligation to safeguard those rights. The whole purpose of the Human Rights Act was to “bring rights home” – that is, to require the national authorities by law to protect the rights at domestic level and to provide a remedy in the national courts in the event of their failure to do so. The threat to repeal the Act poses a serious danger to the effective protection of individual rights in this country. Of equal concern is the threat to withdraw the UK from the Convention system itself, to which all but one of the countries in Europe, Belarus, are a part. This would not only erode the human rights protection which citizens of the UK currently enjoy; it would also do serious damage to the influence and standing of a country that has played a vital role since the Convention system was first conceived. More than this, the loss of the UK would do untold harm to the Convention system itself, a system which currently protects 820 million people across 47 countries.

What is your lasting memory of your time at the Court?

I have been involved with the Convention system for some 45 years, including as a judge of the Court for 14 years and a member of the European Commission of Human Rights for 5 years before that. In that time I was involved in a large number of cases, including very memorable cases, against the UK and against other states. The Convention system, and the work of the Court, has been a great force for good. The improvements which have been brought about by the judgments and decisions of those bodies in the protection of fundamental human rights, particularly in the newer democracies, have been nothing short of profound. I feel greatly privileged to have been able to play a part in that process.

Facts and Figures

Violations by the UK 1959-2014

UK Applications to the ECHR

Judgments involving the UK since 1959 2500

2000

1500

1000

Right to life Slavery

500

Torture, inhuman and degrading treatment Liberty and security

No Punishment without law Thought, conscience and religion Assembley and Association Non-discrimination

Property

Judgments finding violation

Judgments funding no violation

Settled

Other

Fair Trial Private and Family Life

0 2014

2013

2012

2011

Expression Marry and found a family Education

Total Applications

Admissible

Inadmissible

Free Elections

Applications from the UK 2014

Total Applications to the ECHR 2014

ECHR Judgments involving the UK by year 35 30 25 20 15 10 5

Judgments against the UK

The Human Rights Timeline European Court of Human Rights founded

1959

First UK case at the European Court of Human Rights

Human Rights Act gives direct access to rights in UK

First Human Rights Act case in the UK

1975

1998

2001

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

0 2001

Inadmissible

2000

Admissible

Inadmissible

1999

Admissible

Judgments for the UK

Government plans to scrap Human Rights Act and change UK’s relationship with the European Court of Human Rights

2015

Permanent European Court of Human Rights established

HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION 11

Corrections

uman rights law protects everyone, including the media. Freedom of expression means it isn’t easy to compel individuals and groups to tell the truth about human rights. That hasn’t stopped lawyer Shoaib M Khan, who has succeeded at least a dozen times in getting newspapers such as the Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph to publish corrections. The most notable was for an article the then Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, Chris Grayling, wrote for the Mail in October 2014. Says Shoaib: “This article was to be Mr Grayling’s grand announcement of the Tories’ plan to reform human rights laws if they were re-elected. But, being the first non-lawyer Lord Chancellor for almost four centuries, Mr Grayling made a number of mistakes in that article. I lodged a complaint with the Daily Mail and, after extensive correspondence, a correction was published almost five weeks later. “The newspaper then offered to publish a letter from me clarifying the true legal position but published it only in the print

version. Eventually, I had to escalate my complaint to Ipso (the Independent Press Standards Organisation) and that complaint was published online as well. “It is hard to see how the errors in the article, points of fundamental human rights law, could be anything but deliberate. Even if the finer points of the law escaped Mr Grayling himself, surely an article such as this would be checked and rechecked extensively and repeatedly within the Ministry of Justice before being submitted for publication? If so, it is inconceivable that no lawyer at the Ministry would have noticed these basic errors.

“

It is hard to see how the errors in the article, points of fundamental human rights law, could be anything but deliberate.

”

“Similarly, surely someone at the Daily Mail will have edited or checked the article to ensure it was accurate? It is therefore highly likely that these are not innocent mistakes but part of a concerted effort to distort the truth and mislead the public. This makes it all the more important that we make a

12 HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION

conscious effort to counter such misleading statements, wherever they are made.” Complaints to newspapers can take many months to resolve and Shoaib knows that by then the original, misleading article will have been read, shared and cited countless times and people may already have made their minds up about the issue. But this hasn’t stopped him fighting to see that the truth about human rights is published, also being quoted in other newspapers and blogs and appearing on television to discuss current human rights developments in the UK. Shoaib’s successes include forcing the Daily Mail to admit that a claim in a comment article about the European Court of Human Rights, that the supply of heroin and gay porn to prisoners was now a ‘right’, was “not meant to be taken seriously” and that it had wrongly stated in a headline that the European Court of Rights was part of the European Union, and getting the Telegraph to publish a 230 word “update” to a piece on immigration. The writer had begun with the words: “On few subjects is more nonsense talked these days than on immigration.”

Whether Forecast What would happen if the Human Rights Act were abolished? Here’s our forecast. Local storms more frequent Without the Human Rights Act putting a legal duty on our public authorities to respect and protect rights, there won’t be an Will the incentive for public Human Rights Act officials to make rightsbe abolished? respecting decisions. We’d likely see more complaints, and more expensive legal challenges testing the new parameters of the law.

Wind blows towards Strasbourg Repealing the Human Rights Act would not pull the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Convention rights made a part of domestic law by the Act would still exist, but it may mean people’s remedies would be hundreds of miles away at the European Court of Human Rights

in Strasbourg. We’d likely see many more people having to make the long, arduous journey to Strasbourg to get access to their rights.

Big differences for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland Respect for the rights contained in the European Convention is written into the devolution agreements for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Even if the Human Rights Act were repealed, the governments of these countries would be obliged to only pass legislation that respected these rights or be challenged. These agreements cannot be altered without the consent of the devolved nations, and the NI settlement is part of an international peace treaty. This would likely leave the UK with different systems of rights protection across the nations.

Chill sweeps across Europe Ignoring judgments from Strasbourg would make the UK’s relationship with the European Court of Human Rights unsustainable. Eventually the UK would possibly withdraw or be expelled, significantly effecting the UK’s

Crossword 1

6 7 8 9 10

international standing. Recently we have seen a dialogue developing between the UK courts and the European Court of Human Rights, with the UK courts using the Human Rights Act to interpret rights in accordance with our local constitution customs and traditions, and those rulings then being very carefully considered by the European Court, who have in some instances changed tack to follow the rulings of UK courts. Backtracking on our rights or weakening our human rights protections would threaten this progress and lose us future influence.

UK out in the cold A UK that backtracks on human rights would not be a UK that has an authoritative voice in the international human rights community. The last country to withdraw from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights was Greece when the military dictatorship took power in 1967. The UK leaving the European Convention on Human Rights or weakening the Convention rights in a new bill of rights would give legitimacy to other countries with poor human rights records to do the same.

Across 6. ___ Roosevelt, the woman involved in drafting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (7) 7. The prohibition on the __ penalty, no longer allowed in the UK due to Article 1 Protocol 13 in the Human Rights Act (5) 8. Want a free press? Then good thing freedom of expression or __ is protected by Article 10 of the Human Rights Act (6) 10. An Englishman’s __ is his castle, and everyone’s right to respect for this is protected by Article 8 of the Human Rights Act (4) 11. __ __ started the UK’s journey towards human rights protection for everyone, 800 years old this year (5, 5) 13. Everyone should be treated with equal dignity and respect, and this is protected in the right to non-__, under Article 14 of the Human Rights Act (14) 14. A fourteen letter word starting with A and ending with Y, making sure those with duties fulfil them, something at the heart of human rights laws. (14)

Down 1. __ __ former South African president, Nobel peace prize winner and global human rights activist (6, 7) 2. The month global human rights day is celebrated (8) 3. When your human rights are violated it is a __ (6) 4. The General Election was this year, the right to __ is protected in Article 3 Protocol 1 of the Human Rights Act (4) 5. __ __ the 18th Century British philosopher and activist, author of the Rights of Man (6, 5) 9. When a human rights case goes to court, the judge will explain her findings in a __ (9) 12. Each of the sixteen rights in the Human Rights Act is called an A__ (8)

HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION 13

Prejudices and Preconceptions

We answer your queries and concerns about human rights Isn’t human rights just Europe telling us what to do? How come Europe has a say over prisoner voting? The UK has been signed up to the European Convention of Human Rights (which we were instrumental in drafting) since the 1950s but people had to go all the way to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg if their rights were at risk. Now that the Human Rights Act has made the rights in the Convention part of our law, we can go to our local court or tribunal and ask a British judge to decide if our rights at risk or have been breached. The European Court ruled back in 2005 that the UK’s blanket ban preventing all prisoners from voting was a breach of the right to free elections. They didn’t rule that all prisoners had to be allowed to vote, only that a blanket ban was unlawful. Importantly, the Court only rules on whether people rights have been breached, it doesn’t rule on how that needs to be remedied. It is for the country concerned to decide how to comply with the judgment. Other countries such as Latvia with similar blanket bans on prisoner voting to the UK altered their laws. Although the last group of prisoners who took their case to the Court won their case, they were not awarded any costs or damages.

Why did the European Court say we could not send people to jail for the rest of their lives? It didn’t. The original case said sentences

that were grossly disproportionate would violate Article 3 (the right to be free from inhuman and degrading treatment). A socalled ‘whole life’ sentence with no prospect of review was not necessarily grossly disproportionate but there had to be some sort of safeguard to make sure that the sentence was still justifiable and necessary. It’s worth noting that this wouldn’t make the prisoner eligible for parole. There was a breach of Article 3 because the rules on the only form of review available – compassionate release at the Home Secretary’s discretion – were not sufficiently clear. This did not require the UK to release the prisoners who applied to the Court or reduce their sentences. The UK government clarified the rules around discretion and the European Court recently ruled that whole life sentences in the UK did not breach Article 3.

Why can foreign criminals use human rights to stay in the country? The Human Rights Act applies to everybody in the UK, regardless of who they are and what they’ve done. That is a fundamental principle of human rights; they are universal and no government gets to pick and choose who has rights. But many of our rights can be limited or restricted, including if someone has committed an offence. The right to respect for family life is often relied on by people facing automatic deportation from the UK after a prison sentence, as a last line of defence. But this

14 HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION

right can be restricted and judges will weigh it up against other considerations, such as the risk someone poses to society and the seriousness of the crime committed. If there is a serious risk to society, this will outweigh family life arguments. Otherwise, the judge will weigh up the argument for the right to family life, such as having British children (who have their own family life rights) or someone having been in the UK since childhood. Most cases which are successful involve one of these factors. If there is a real risk of torture in the country the person is to be sent to, then the absolute ban on torture prohibits deportation. This is not simply about the Human Rights Act or the European Convention on Human Rights, it is also part of the UK’s obligations under international treaties against torture. This is vital to the rule of law and important in allowing the UK to persuade other countries to respect their human rights obligations.

If human rights are for everyone why can’t I use mine? Section 6 of the Human Rights Act means there is a legal duty on public authorities to respect and protect human rights when making all decisions. Not all local authorities are aware of this and part of BIHR’s work is supporting public authorities to understand how they can use their obligations to respect human rights to make good decisions. It is still hard for many people to get their rights respected, particularly out of court, but more and more people are succeeding. You can find

real life example and handy guides on BIHR’s website in the “What you need to know” section. Section 6 of the Human Rights Act means there is a legal duty on public authorities to respect and protect human rights when making all decisions. Not all local authorities are aware of this and part of BIHR’s work is supporting public authorities to understand how they can use their obligations to respect human rights to make good decisions. It is still hard for many people to get their rights respected, particularly out of court, but more and more people are succeeding. You can find real life example and handy guides on BIHR’s website in the “What you need to know” section.

Why do human rights stop police from putting people on wanted posters? They don’t. Everybody has the right to respect for private life, but that right can be restricted to protect the rights of others, or to protect the wider needs of the community, including the prevention of crime. This allows the police to restrict people’s right to privacy and use wanted posters, provided they don’t act in a disproportionate way. In one incident the police released CCTV images of someone attempted to take their own life which was challenged and found to have breached their right to privacy. This is rather different to stories of human rights preventing the police from issuing wanted posters (what about Crimewatch and the

like?), such stories are the result of errors by the police or simply bad reporting.

Aren’t the people who benefit most from human rights the lawyers? It is ‘we the people’ who benefit most from human rights, through the protection they give us. Many human rights issues are now resolved in out of court situations through individuals speaking directly with public officials to negotiate solutions. Such as the learning disabled couple in the news section on page 2.

violation in 14 cases. An initial application to the court is free, and the government is only notified of a claim in the court once it passes the application stage. The figures reported are estimated and appear to include the costs of all of the 1,997 cases in 2014 that went as far as the Court of Appeal stage in the UK, which has nothing to do with the European Court of Human Rights.

Where people do need legal advice, its also worth noting that many lawyers do pro bono (free) work on human rights cases. In one case a judge warned of a breach of a family’s human rights in care proceedings where two learning disabled parents did not qualify for legal aid but could not afford a lawyer. Following the removal of the child months before, both parents had had over 100 hours of pro bono support from lawyers, who paid their own expenses and travel. Without this support, the parents would have lost their child for good, without a fair hearing.

Is it true that the UK wasted £2.1 billion on European Court of Human Rights cases in 2014? Figures from the Council of Europe for 2014 showed that 99% of cases against the UK government were ruled inadmissible (thrown out before going to a full hearing). Of those that went ahead, the court found a violation against the UK in 13 cases but found no

HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION 15

Five reasons we should all cherish our Human Rights Act 1. It makes the promise of universal human rights the law here at home, protecting everyone, no matter who we are. 2. It empowers us to live with dignity and respect in our everyday lives, knowing we all have legal rights to privacy, education, fair trial, family life, liberty, freedom of speech and more. 3. It sets the rules for how our government and public officials should treat us, making them accountable, whether that is helping victims get justice, protecting children from abuse, preventing neglect in hospitals or stopping drastic cuts to disabled people’s care. 4. It makes our democracy work by giving everyone a voice, avoiding only the loudest from having a say. 5. It is not a magic wand but it is a vital safety net for all us, an insurance policy that we hope you don’t need, but you have the comfort of knowing you are protected. Thanks to the Human Rights Act protecting the right to freedom of expression, we can all express our opinions, including those attacking the Human Rights Act. Now is the time for people who cherish the rights and duties in our Human Rights Act to join the debate. Visit www.bihr.org.uk/together Get informed. Get active. Get heard.

We need your support As an independent charity the British Institute of Human Rights relies on the support of people who want to ensure human rights are respected and protected here at home. The kind support of BIHR Friends helps us achieve our mission of bringing human rights to life for people across the UK. You can: ■ Be a Friend of BIHR with a regular donation of £5/month or £60/year. ■ Organisations can also be a Firm Friend, from as little as £10. Visit www.bihr.org.uk/become-a-friend for details. One-off donations to BIHR can also be made at www.bihr.org.uk/donate. Thank you for your support.

16 HUMAN WRITES SPECIAL ANNIVERSARY EDITION