Equalities watchdog welcomes decision to pause Bill of Rights Bill

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has welcomed the decision of the newly-formed UK Government to pause the passage of the Bill of Rights Bill as part of a review of cross-departmental priorities.

The EHRC said the pause represented an opportunity to reconsider the Bill’s provisions.

The Bill of Rights Bill was introduced by the previous administration as part of a manifesto commitment to overhaul the Human Rights Act and replace it with a Bill of Rights.

In a statement acknowledging the decision to pause its progress, a Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “As is the case whenever a new Government is formed, there is a review of cross-departmental priorities to ensure they are the most effective way of delivering the Government’s objectives.”

Responding to the move, Baroness Kishwer Falkner, Chairwoman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, wrote to Brandon Lewis MP, the new Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, welcoming the decision.

Baroness Falkner wrote: “It is our view that the Human Rights Act 1998 has substantially improved rights protections for people in the UK and should be retained. It enables access to redress in domestic courts for breaches of European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) rights while maintaining Parliamentary sovereignty, and has led to a strengthening of the UK’s human rights legal framework.”

The baroness also welcomed the Government’s commitment to remain party to the ECHR but added that the Commission was “concerned that proposals in the Bill of Rights Bill would have risked reducing human rights protections and access to justice, while undermining core principles of the human rights framework”.

In particular, the Commission raised concerns that the Bill could potentially weaken the UK’s framework of human rights protections, reduce access to redress for breaches of human rights, have implications for the protection of freedom of expression, and have significant constitutional implications, including for the Union.

In the run up to the introduction of the legislation earlier this year, the Welsh and Scottish Governments strongly criticised the Bill.

Baroness Falkner’s letter continued: “We recognise that many of [the Bill’s proposals] stemmed from commitments in the Government’s 2019 manifesto. But we consider that substantive changes to constitutional provisions and human rights laws, as were proposed, should be subject to full parliamentary examination.”

She noted that this should include pre-legislation scrutiny, consultation with the public and relevant stakeholders, and with the devolved administrations.

The Commission also encouraged the Government to give fresh consideration to the findings of the Independent Human Rights Act Review (IHRAR), in particular its recommendation for greater civic education to foster public ownership of human rights.

In March 2022, a month before the Bill was introduced to Parliament, Lawyers in Local Government (LLG) said in a response to a Government consultation that it opposes proposals that “seek to reduce the accountability of public authorities or undermine the rule of law”.

LLG said the 1998 Act “plays a key and critically important role in the fundamental protection of human rights. The Independent Human Rights Act Review itself found no good case for making significant changes to the Human Rights Act 1998.”

The Law Society meanwhile said in its response that it did not believe there was a case for the sweeping reforms proposed.

Adam Carey