human rights essay uk

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

Essay on Human Rights: Samples in 500 and 1500

• Updated on  
• Dec 9, 2023

Essay writing is an integral part of the school curriculum and various academic and competitive exams like IELTS , TOEFL , SAT , UPSC , etc. It is designed to test your command of the English language and how well you can gather your thoughts and present them in a structure with a flow. To master your ability to write an essay, you must read as much as possible and practise on any given topic. This blog brings you a detailed guide on how to write an essay on Human Rights , with useful essay samples on Human rights.

This Blog Includes:

The basic human rights, 200 words essay on human rights, 500 words essay on human rights, 500+ words essay on human rights in india, 1500 words essay on human rights, importance of human rights, essay on human rights pdf.

Also Read: List of Human Rights Courses

Also Read: MSc Human Rights

Also Read: 1-Minute Speech on Human Rights for Students

What are Human Rights

Human rights mark everyone as free and equal, irrespective of age, gender, caste, creed, religion and nationality. The United Nations adopted human rights in light of the atrocities people faced during the Second World War. On the 10th of December 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Its adoption led to the recognition of human rights as the foundation for freedom, justice and peace for every individual. Although it’s not legally binding, most nations have incorporated these human rights into their constitutions and domestic legal frameworks. Human rights safeguard us from discrimination and guarantee that our most basic needs are protected.

Did you know that the 10th of December is celebrated as Human Rights Day ?

Before we move on to the essays on human rights, let’s check out the basics of what they are.

Also Read: What are Human Rights?

Also Read: 7 Impactful Human Rights Movies Everyone Must Watch!

Here is a 200-word short sample essay on basic Human Rights.

Human rights are a set of rights given to every human being regardless of their gender, caste, creed, religion, nation, location or economic status. These are said to be moral principles that illustrate certain standards of human behaviour. Protected by law , these rights are applicable everywhere and at any time. Basic human rights include the right to life, right to a fair trial, right to remedy by a competent tribunal, right to liberty and personal security, right to own property, right to education, right of peaceful assembly and association, right to marriage and family, right to nationality and freedom to change it, freedom of speech, freedom from discrimination, freedom from slavery, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of movement, right of opinion and information, right to adequate living standard and freedom from interference with privacy, family, home and correspondence.

Also Read: Law Courses

Check out this 500-word long essay on Human Rights.

Every person has dignity and value. One of the ways that we recognise the fundamental worth of every person is by acknowledging and respecting their human rights. Human rights are a set of principles concerned with equality and fairness. They recognise our freedom to make choices about our lives and develop our potential as human beings. They are about living a life free from fear, harassment or discrimination.

Human rights can broadly be defined as the basic rights that people worldwide have agreed are essential. These include the right to life, the right to a fair trial, freedom from torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to health, education and an adequate standard of living. These human rights are the same for all people everywhere – men and women, young and old, rich and poor, regardless of our background, where we live, what we think or believe. This basic property is what makes human rights’ universal’.

Human rights connect us all through a shared set of rights and responsibilities. People’s ability to enjoy their human rights depends on other people respecting those rights. This means that human rights involve responsibility and duties towards other people and the community. Individuals have a responsibility to ensure that they exercise their rights with consideration for the rights of others. For example, when someone uses their right to freedom of speech, they should do so without interfering with someone else’s right to privacy.

Governments have a particular responsibility to ensure that people can enjoy their rights. They must establish and maintain laws and services that enable people to enjoy a life in which their rights are respected and protected. For example, the right to education says that everyone is entitled to a good education. Therefore, governments must provide good quality education facilities and services to their people. If the government fails to respect or protect their basic human rights, people can take it into account.

Values of tolerance, equality and respect can help reduce friction within society. Putting human rights ideas into practice can help us create the kind of society we want to live in. There has been tremendous growth in how we think about and apply human rights ideas in recent decades. This growth has had many positive results – knowledge about human rights can empower individuals and offer solutions for specific problems.

Human rights are an important part of how people interact with others at all levels of society – in the family, the community, school, workplace, politics and international relations. Therefore, people everywhere must strive to understand what human rights are. When people better understand human rights, it is easier for them to promote justice and the well-being of society. 

Also Read: Important Articles in Indian Constitution

Here is a human rights essay focused on India.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. It has been rightly proclaimed in the American Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Created with certain unalienable rights….” Similarly, the Indian Constitution has ensured and enshrined Fundamental rights for all citizens irrespective of caste, creed, religion, colour, sex or nationality. These basic rights, commonly known as human rights, are recognised the world over as basic rights with which every individual is born.

In recognition of human rights, “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was made on the 10th of December, 1948. This declaration is the basic instrument of human rights. Even though this declaration has no legal bindings and authority, it forms the basis of all laws on human rights. The necessity of formulating laws to protect human rights is now being felt all over the world. According to social thinkers, the issue of human rights became very important after World War II concluded. It is important for social stability both at the national and international levels. Wherever there is a breach of human rights, there is conflict at one level or the other.

Given the increasing importance of the subject, it becomes necessary that educational institutions recognise the subject of human rights as an independent discipline. The course contents and curriculum of the discipline of human rights may vary according to the nature and circumstances of a particular institution. Still, generally, it should include the rights of a child, rights of minorities, rights of the needy and the disabled, right to live, convention on women, trafficking of women and children for sexual exploitation etc.

Since the formation of the United Nations , the promotion and protection of human rights have been its main focus. The United Nations has created a wide range of mechanisms for monitoring human rights violations. The conventional mechanisms include treaties and organisations, U.N. special reporters, representatives and experts and working groups. Asian countries like China argue in favour of collective rights. According to Chinese thinkers, European countries lay stress upon individual rights and values while Asian countries esteem collective rights and obligations to the family and society as a whole.

With the freedom movement the world over after World War II, the end of colonisation also ended the policy of apartheid and thereby the most aggressive violation of human rights. With the spread of education, women are asserting their rights. Women’s movements play an important role in spreading the message of human rights. They are fighting for their rights and supporting the struggle for human rights of other weaker and deprived sections like bonded labour, child labour, landless labour, unemployed persons, Dalits and elderly people.

Unfortunately, violation of human rights continues in most parts of the world. Ethnic cleansing and genocide can still be seen in several parts of the world. Large sections of the world population are deprived of the necessities of life i.e. food, shelter and security of life. Right to minimum basic needs viz. Work, health care, education and shelter are denied to them. These deprivations amount to the negation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Also Read: Human Rights Courses

Check out this detailed 1500-word essay on human rights.

The human right to live and exist, the right to equality, including equality before the law, non-discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth, and equality of opportunity in matters of employment, the right to freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, the right to practice any profession or occupation, the right against exploitation, prohibiting all forms of forced labour, child labour and trafficking in human beings, the right to freedom of conscience, practice and propagation of religion and the right to legal remedies for enforcement of the above are basic human rights. These rights and freedoms are the very foundations of democracy.

Obviously, in a democracy, the people enjoy the maximum number of freedoms and rights. Besides these are political rights, which include the right to contest an election and vote freely for a candidate of one’s choice. Human rights are a benchmark of a developed and civilised society. But rights cannot exist in a vacuum. They have their corresponding duties. Rights and duties are the two aspects of the same coin.

Liberty never means license. Rights presuppose the rule of law, where everyone in the society follows a code of conduct and behaviour for the good of all. It is the sense of duty and tolerance that gives meaning to rights. Rights have their basis in the ‘live and let live’ principle. For example, my right to speech and expression involves my duty to allow others to enjoy the same freedom of speech and expression. Rights and duties are inextricably interlinked and interdependent. A perfect balance is to be maintained between the two. Whenever there is an imbalance, there is chaos.

A sense of tolerance, propriety and adjustment is a must to enjoy rights and freedom. Human life sans basic freedom and rights is meaningless. Freedom is the most precious possession without which life would become intolerable, a mere abject and slavish existence. In this context, Milton’s famous and oft-quoted lines from his Paradise Lost come to mind: “To reign is worth ambition though in hell/Better to reign in hell, than serve in heaven.”

However, liberty cannot survive without its corresponding obligations and duties. An individual is a part of society in which he enjoys certain rights and freedom only because of the fulfilment of certain duties and obligations towards others. Thus, freedom is based on mutual respect’s rights. A fine balance must be maintained between the two, or there will be anarchy and bloodshed. Therefore, human rights can best be preserved and protected in a society steeped in morality, discipline and social order.

Violation of human rights is most common in totalitarian and despotic states. In the theocratic states, there is much persecution, and violation in the name of religion and the minorities suffer the most. Even in democracies, there is widespread violation and infringement of human rights and freedom. The women, children and the weaker sections of society are victims of these transgressions and violence.

The U.N. Commission on Human Rights’ main concern is to protect and promote human rights and freedom in the world’s nations. In its various sessions held from time to time in Geneva, it adopts various measures to encourage worldwide observations of these basic human rights and freedom. It calls on its member states to furnish information regarding measures that comply with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights whenever there is a complaint of a violation of these rights. In addition, it reviews human rights situations in various countries and initiates remedial measures when required.

The U.N. Commission was much concerned and dismayed at the apartheid being practised in South Africa till recently. The Secretary-General then declared, “The United Nations cannot tolerate apartheid. It is a legalised system of racial discrimination, violating the most basic human rights in South Africa. It contradicts the letter and spirit of the United Nations Charter. That is why over the last forty years, my predecessors and I have urged the Government of South Africa to dismantle it.”

Now, although apartheid is no longer practised in that country, other forms of apartheid are being blatantly practised worldwide. For example, sex apartheid is most rampant. Women are subject to abuse and exploitation. They are not treated equally and get less pay than their male counterparts for the same jobs. In employment, promotions, possession of property etc., they are most discriminated against. Similarly, the rights of children are not observed properly. They are forced to work hard in very dangerous situations, sexually assaulted and exploited, sold and bonded for labour.

The Commission found that religious persecution, torture, summary executions without judicial trials, intolerance, slavery-like practices, kidnapping, political disappearance, etc., are being practised even in the so-called advanced countries and societies. The continued acts of extreme violence, terrorism and extremism in various parts of the world like Pakistan, India, Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Somalia, Algeria, Lebanon, Chile, China, and Myanmar, etc., by the governments, terrorists, religious fundamentalists, and mafia outfits, etc., is a matter of grave concern for the entire human race.

Violation of freedom and rights by terrorist groups backed by states is one of the most difficult problems society faces. For example, Pakistan has been openly collaborating with various terrorist groups, indulging in extreme violence in India and other countries. In this regard the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva adopted a significant resolution, which was co-sponsored by India, focusing on gross violation of human rights perpetrated by state-backed terrorist groups.

The resolution expressed its solidarity with the victims of terrorism and proposed that a U.N. Fund for victims of terrorism be established soon. The Indian delegation recalled that according to the Vienna Declaration, terrorism is nothing but the destruction of human rights. It shows total disregard for the lives of innocent men, women and children. The delegation further argued that terrorism cannot be treated as a mere crime because it is systematic and widespread in its killing of civilians.

Violation of human rights, whether by states, terrorists, separatist groups, armed fundamentalists or extremists, is condemnable. Regardless of the motivation, such acts should be condemned categorically in all forms and manifestations, wherever and by whomever they are committed, as acts of aggression aimed at destroying human rights, fundamental freedom and democracy. The Indian delegation also underlined concerns about the growing connection between terrorist groups and the consequent commission of serious crimes. These include rape, torture, arson, looting, murder, kidnappings, blasts, and extortion, etc.

Violation of human rights and freedom gives rise to alienation, dissatisfaction, frustration and acts of terrorism. Governments run by ambitious and self-seeking people often use repressive measures and find violence and terror an effective means of control. However, state terrorism, violence, and human freedom transgressions are very dangerous strategies. This has been the background of all revolutions in the world. Whenever there is systematic and widespread state persecution and violation of human rights, rebellion and revolution have taken place. The French, American, Russian and Chinese Revolutions are glowing examples of human history.

The first war of India’s Independence in 1857 resulted from long and systematic oppression of the Indian masses. The rapidly increasing discontent, frustration and alienation with British rule gave rise to strong national feelings and demand for political privileges and rights. Ultimately the Indian people, under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi, made the British leave India, setting the country free and independent.

Human rights and freedom ought to be preserved at all costs. Their curtailment degrades human life. The political needs of a country may reshape Human rights, but they should not be completely distorted. Tyranny, regimentation, etc., are inimical of humanity and should be resisted effectively and united. The sanctity of human values, freedom and rights must be preserved and protected. Human Rights Commissions should be established in all countries to take care of human freedom and rights. In cases of violation of human rights, affected individuals should be properly compensated, and it should be ensured that these do not take place in future.

These commissions can become effective instruments in percolating the sensitivity to human rights down to the lowest levels of governments and administrations. The formation of the National Human Rights Commission in October 1993 in India is commendable and should be followed by other countries.

Also Read: Law Courses in India

Human rights are of utmost importance to seek basic equality and human dignity. Human rights ensure that the basic needs of every human are met. They protect vulnerable groups from discrimination and abuse, allow people to stand up for themselves, and follow any religion without fear and give them the freedom to express their thoughts freely. In addition, they grant people access to basic education and equal work opportunities. Thus implementing these rights is crucial to ensure freedom, peace and safety.

Human Rights Day is annually celebrated on the 10th of December.

Human Rights Day is celebrated to commemorate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UNGA in 1948.

Some of the common Human Rights are the right to life and liberty, freedom of opinion and expression, freedom from slavery and torture and the right to work and education.

We hope our sample essays on Human Rights have given you some great ideas. For more information on such interesting blogs, visit our essay writing page and follow Leverage Edu .

Sonal is a creative, enthusiastic writer and editor who has worked extensively for the Study Abroad domain. She splits her time between shooting fun insta reels and learning new tools for content marketing. If she is missing from her desk, you can find her with a group of people cracking silly jokes or petting neighbourhood dogs.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Leaving already?

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Grab this one-time opportunity to download this ebook

Connect With Us

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

September 2024

January 2025

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

• Human rights

Graham Turnbull human rights essay competition and lecture

It was named in memory of Graham Turnbull, an English human rights solicitor killed in 1997.

The winner of the competition is awarded a £500 cash prize by the Graham Turnbull Memorial Fund at an annual lecture, joined by a prominent keynote speaker.

The competition was previously administered by the Law Society. From 2023, it will be solely organised by the Graham Turnbull Memorial Fund.

While we're sorry to no longer be hosting the competition and lecture, we are glad that its legacy – and that of Graham Turnbull – will continue.

2023 competition

This year's essay title is:

"What are the human rights implications of the failure of a state to take action to prevent global temperature rises which threaten the health or lives of their citizens?"

The deadline for entries is 5pm on Friday 20 October 2023.

The competition is open to all law students, trainee solicitors, pupil barristers, and solicitors and barristers within three years of admission or call at the closing date.

Essays must reach Tony Fisher, chair of trustees of the memorial fund, by email at  [email protected]  by 6pm on Friday 20 October 2023.

Entries should be a maximum of 2,000 words, including footnotes.

Proof of eligibility must be included.

The winning essay will be chosen by a panel of distinguished judges. The judges' decision is final and no correspondence will be entered into.

Download the full rules and eligibility criteria (PDF 110 KB) , which must be read before entering. 

About Graham Turnbull

Graham Turnbull was an English solicitor from Yorkshire.

He travelled to Rwanda in 1994 where he worked as a human rights monitor on the United Nations Human Rights Mission, investigating reprisal killings in the aftermath of the Rwandan genocide.

He was killed in 1997, aged 37, along with four others, in an apparent state-sanctioned ambush as they travelled in clearly marked UN vehicles.

The killings were condemned internationally and led to the UN temporarily suspending its operations in the region and withdrawing aid workers.

Previous winners

Discover previous essay questions and read the winning entries:

2021 winner: Robert Watt  

'What improvements, if any, should be made to the Human Rights Act 1998? Why are they needed?'

Read Robert's essay (PDF 171 KB)

Highly commended essays: Devni Mindula Kitulagoda, Katt Godfray

2019 winner: Nick Jones  

'Has the rule of law been replaced by the law of politics?'

Read Nick's essay (PDF 553 KB)

2018 winner: Alice Munnelly  

'Is technology an opportunity or a threat for human rights lawyers? Does it increase or reduce risks for lawyers in carrying out their duties and in what circumstances might technology be used to mitigate such risks?'

Read Alice's essay (PDF 551 KB)

2017 winner: Alexander McColl  

'Should UK forces have immunity against civil claims brought against them claiming breach of rights protected under the ECHR in situations of conflict, peacekeeping, or policing?'

Read Andrew's essay (PDF 171 KB)

2016 winner: Kerry Nicholson  

‘A most radical recommendation? Should interception warrants be judicially authorised or does there need to be democratic accountability?’

Read Kerry’s essay (PDF 677 KB)

2015 winner: Ian Robert McDonald  

A discussion on the Human Rights Act 1998, the European Convention of Human Rights, and the Magna Carta.

‘The roots of many of our basic rights go back to Magna Carta, whose 800th anniversary is being celebrated in 2015.

Given this important legacy, to what extent would proposals to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 and pull out of the European Convention on Human Rights impact on the protection of human rights in the UK and around the world?’

Read Ian’s essay (PDF 691 KB)

2014 winner: Rebecca Hadgett  

‘Applying human rights and humanitarian law, in what circumstances should forcible measures be permitted against a state that is subjecting its people to human rights abuses?’

Read Rebecca’s essay (PDF 683 KB)

2013 winner: Niall Coghlan  

‘In view of the scope and extent of the civil legal aid cuts, is the UK in breach of its obligations under the European Conventions on Human Rights?’

Read Niall’s essay (PDF 654 KB)

2012 winner: Stephen Gummer  

‘In the light of the growing prison population, should we look for alternatives to imprisonment?’

Read Stephen’s essay (PDF 670 KB)

2011 winner: James Potts  

‘Does everyone in the UK have access to adequate housing, health care, social security and employment? If not, would a bill of rights help?’

Read James’ essay (PDF 689 KB)

2010 winner: Sanjivi Krishnan  

‘Can human rights be universal and have respect for cultural relativism?’

Read Sanjivi’s essay (PDF 572 KB)

Maximise your Law Society membership with My LS

Have you found this page helpful?

• Apprentice or trainee
• International
• Junior Solicitors Network
• Rule of law

The Politics Shed- A Free Text Book for all students of Politics.

How well are Rights protected in the UK?

How effective is the judiciary at protecting civil liberties.

The History and development of Rights in the UK

What has been the effect of the Human Rights Act? Has it worked?

Recent changes such as the Human Rights Act , Freedom of Information Act and Equality Act   and the creation of a Supreme Court has led to the suggestion that there is now a ' rights-based culture ' in the UK.

In 2001 Parliament established th e The Joint Committee on Human Rights which as a consequence of the HRA review the application of incompatibility orders which result from a conflict between the Act and existing or proposed legislation. The Committee is also an important watchdog with a general function of reviewing all new laws and thier impact on human rights with regard to common law and international law.

But the HRA has limitations,  while all new legislation must be compliant wi th the act and judges can declare earlier acts of Parliament incompatible with it they  cannot legally compel Parliament to make changes. This is because of the all-important concept of parliamentary sovereignty so the HRA is not entrenched (i.e. it's not a form of higher law like the US Bill of Rights)

So to be clear: The UK does not have a Bill of Rights!

Evidence for  rights based culture might be  an increased use of judicial review . The number of reviews rose from around 4240 in 2000 to around 15,600 by 2013. Examples of successful challenges to government policies include High Court rulings that retired Gurkha soldiers should be allowed to settle in the UK (2008), and that the government had not consulted fairly on compensation for people affected by the planned High Speed Rail link (2013).

Judicial Review Cases

A prominent example of judicial review — sometimes called `judge-made law' — is the issue of privacy. Judges have been accused of effectively creating a privacy law through the way they have interpreted the Human Rights Act. In a series of high-profile court cases, they appeared to give priority to Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to privacy) over Article 10 (the right to freedom of expression), as claimed by the press. This occurred even though specific legislation on the subject had not been passed by Parliament, and was not a prominent feature of common law . This called in to question the principle of the Rule of Law since wealthy individuals, who could afford to take legal action, had an unfair advantage. For example, in 2008 the High Court awarded Max Mosley, the head of the Formula 1 motor racing organisation, substantial damages when the News of the World published a story about his sex life, which he argued had breached his privacy. Max Mosley failed in a subsequent case at the European Court of Human Rights, which refused to rule that newspapers should notify people before printing stories about their personal lives.

A criminals' charter?

Another serious fault for Conservative critics of the Human Rights Act is the way that it seems to show favour to undeserving individuals, rather than protecting the legitimate freedoms of UK citizens. The Conservatives have argued for many years for the replacement of the act with a new 'British Bill of Rights', which would establish the supremacy of British courts over the European Court of Human Rights. The case of Abu Qatada illustrates the frustration caused by the way in which the Human Rights Act was implemented.

 Unelected judges with too much power? - Judicial Tyranny

judicial review may be a vital means of defending citizens' rights, enabling the legality of government actions to be properly scrutinised but its critics argue that it places too much power in the hands of unelected and unaccountable judges.

Is the UK Supreme Court too political?

  The Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022  

The HRA has not prevented an attack on civil liberties in recent years

After the 9/11 terror attacks in the USA in 2001, and the 7/7 Underground and bus bombings in 2005, the HRA did not stop the government limiting civil liberties in the interests of protecting the wider community. Ministers argued that they were entitled to detain terror suspects without trial on the grounds that a national emergency existed. In December 2004, in the Case of the Belmarsh 9, the Law Lords (the highest court in the land before the creation of the Supreme Court) ruled that indefinite detention of foreign nationals, on suspicion of involvement in terrorism, was discriminatory. Faced with this legal challenge, the government passed a new law to introduce a system of control orders that enabled suspects to be closely monitored, such as through electronic tagging, a requirement to report to the police and removal of mobile phones and Internet access. Control orders were kept in place, despite adverse rulings by judges, until 2011 when the coalition government replaced them with a modified version known as Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (TPIMs).

The Blair Government was accused of increasing authori­tarianism in the UK. The 2007 film, Taking Liberties, which examined the Blair government's record on civil liberties, even warned about the emergence in the UK of a 'police state'. 

Have civil liberties been under threat? If so, why has this happened?

The Labour government's record on civil liberties between 1997 and 2010 was a mixed one. In the first place, this period witnessed major advances in individual rights, widely welcomed by groups campaigning on civil liberties issues, such as Charter 88, Liberty, and Freedom and Law. The Human Rights Act was the most significant example of this, but others included the Freedom of Information Act 2000, which marked a major advance in open government and helped to establish a public right to know. Other examples of a strengthening of rights include the establishment of the right to roam through the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. This was a culmination of many generations of campaigning by ramblers ( Ramblers Association ) and civil liberties groups.

On the other hand, Labour's critics drew attention to its civil liberties 'blind spot', reflected in the growth of legislation that expands the power of the state and weakens or removes civil liberties or individual rights. Various measures have contributed to this 'drift towards authoritarianism'. For example:

 The right to a jury trial was restricted in 1999 by new rules that made it more difficult for people accused of theft, burglary and assault from opting to be tried by a Crown Court (where juries sit), rather than by a magistrate.

Detention was introduced for asylum seekers whose claims have been refused, and access to the benefits system was replaced by shopping vouchers for refugees.

 Public order legislation led to restrictions being imposed on the right to protest.

Anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs), first introduced in 1999, imposed a range of restrictions on (usually young) 'offenders', often on the basis of hearsay evidence and in the absence of a jury.

The Identity Card Act 2006 provided for identity cards to be phased-in on a voluntary basis from 2009 (although these plans were abandoned after Labour's 2010 defeat).

However, the government's most controversial measures were its anti-terrorism legislation, passed in the aftermath of 9/11 (the 2001 terrorist attack on New York and Washington) and 7/7 (the coordinated 2005 terrorist attacks on London). This gave the police the power to hold suspects for 28 days without being charged (ie told what they were suspected of doing) if they were suspected of terrorism offences.

Changes to Civil Liberties under New Labour  

DNA database, Double Jeopardy (2003) Anti-Terror laws, end of jury trials for Serious Fraud.

 Coalition reforms , Freedom Bill , reversing 28 days, green paper on 'secret courts',  and the Counter Terrorism Ac t   2015 ( Amended 2016)

However, some restrictive measures have been abandoned in the face of parliamentary and public opposition. For example, in November 2005, the Blair government's proposal to extend the period that a suspect could be held before being charged, from 14 to 90 days, was defeated in the Commons. The government then compromised on 28 days and abandoned a subsequent attempt to increase it to 42 days, following a defeat in the Lords in 2008. Under the coalition, the 28-day period was halved, and the Labour government's plan for compulsory identity cards was scrapped.

However, the public has been remarkably willing to sacrifice some liberties at a time of heightened concern over security. Governments have tended to place the safety of society above the protection of individual rights. This explains why pro-human rights pressure groups such as Liberty have had limited success in deflecting government policy. For example, Plans for a British Bill of Rights , Legal aid cuts , Internet Surveillance and Extending Secret Courts -2 013 Justice and Security Act (Closed Material Practices), which permit terrorist suspects and major criminals to be tried without the evidence against them being disclosed in full. The passage of the Investigatory Powers Bill — the so-called 'Snoopers' Charter' —which increases the power of the intelligence agencies by obliging Internet companies to store information about customers' browsing history.

In 2016, Parliament passed the Investigatory Powers Act, which authorises the retention of personal electronic data and its access for law enforcement.

 In 2020, Ed Bridges and the pressure group Liberty brought a case against South Wales Police over whether it could use automatic facial recognition technology. In its judgment, the Court of Appeal ruled that more care should be taken in how the technology is used. However, the benefits to society are ‘potentially great’ and the threat to the individual’s privacy ‘minor’.

In 2020 after a terrorist suspect was released from prison under an early release scheme designed to reduce the prison population, who went on to carry out an attack, the government promised an emergency bill to end early release. The bill was delayed by the COVID crisis but in May the government announced the Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Bill, which as promised ended early release but also gave the police new powers to impose TPims . A TPim imposed strict limits on an individual's freedom. The new law would mean this could be imposed for an unlimited time ( currently they are limited for two years) and the bill would reduce the threshold of evidence to mean a TPims would only need a 'balance of probability' ie - you could be a terrorist !

Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Bill

Reaction to the London attacks

TPims Explained

 The Johnson government’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022  was designed to limit the impact of public protests and has thus generated significant opposition from civil liberties groups.

 In the Queen’s Speech (2022) the Johnson government controversially committed to introducing a British bill of rights, replacing certain elements of the Human Rights Act, so that ‘there is a proper balance between the rights of individuals, our vital national security and effective government, strengthening freedom of speech’. The Human Rights Reform Bill received its first reading in 2022 but has not progressed. The influential Joint Committee on Human Rights said a planned Bill of Rights Act would restrict certain protections "the government finds inconvenient". Liz Truss's government  shelved plans for Human Right Bill with was design designed to give ministers the power to ignore human rights rulings from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).  

In 2022, the Johnson government controversially introduced a policy to fly asylum seekers to Rwanda rather than allow them to claim asylum in the UK. Designed to stem the flow of cross-Channel refugees and deter people-trafficking, the policy was condemned by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, as ‘subcontracting our responsibilities’.

Can asylum seekers be sent to Rwanda ? November 2023 

Nationality and Borders Act 2022: The Nationality and Borders Bill was introduced into the House of Commons in July 2021 and On 27 April 2022 the  Nationality and Border Bill became an Act of law .       Criticisms around the Act include concerns around its departure from international convention and possible incompatibility with international law, and the creation of a two–tier system for refugees, which will penalise those who enter the UK through unofficial routes . Amongst other elements, it proposes to introduce "designated places" or "offshore" asylum hubs for application of refugee and migrant asylum claims, potentially in another European country or an African country  

Essay: How effective are the judiciary at protecting civil rights in the UK (30) Edexcel/AQA A Level

The UK judiciary has several methods at its disposal that provide an effective protection of civil liberties in the UK. However, in practice, there are several shortcomings that make these protections weak in the face of Parliamentary pressure, which will be demonstrated in this essay.

In terms of rights protections, perhaps the most important development in the protection of rights in the UK has been the installation of the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law via the Human Rights Act 1998. This act effectively has provided a concrete document that outlines the rights of citizens. Since the passing of this act, judges have been able rule more confidently based on the legislation rather than using complex declarations of the common law via precedents. The increased ease for judges and clarity for citizens has increased the effectiveness of rights protection by the judiciary because now the judiciary can use articles in the HR Act to rule in favour of individuals. For example, in the case of Catherine Zeta Jones v. Hello Magazine 2001, the court was able to rule clearly that the article 8 right to privacy outweighed the magazine's article 10 right to expression and thus Zeta Jones' wedding was allowed to remain private. This clearly shows an effective protection of liberty by judges.

Furthermore, a vital protection of liberties can be exercised via judicial review. Judicial review is a process that is conducted in the Supreme Court that hears an appeal over the lawfulness of a case. It is not focused on the rights and wrongs of a case, this would be a case for appeal courts following the above methods, judicial review is simply an examination of the lawfulness of a case. For example, in the case of Home Secretary v. AP 2010 an appeal allowing the government to detain AP on a control order was taken to the Supreme Court to review its lawfulness. The Supreme Court ruled that in fact, based on the 2008 JJ case as a precedent, the appeal court's ruling in fact constituted a breach of article 5, and that the article 5 interests also contributed to breaches under article 8 of the act. The resulting ruling was that the government control order was 'ultra vires' and had to be rescinded. In this way, the judiciary's ability to reverse executive action by ruling it beyond its powers provides a very effective protection of liberties in the UK. Other examples of ministers being ruled ultra vires and ordered to reverse actions following judicial review include the freezing of terrorist assets with parliamentary approval in 2005, and more recently the reversal of Theresa May's immigration points system which again had not consulted Parliament.

Finally, if both the above methods fail then the individual can take their appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. Rulings from Europe are effectively binding on government and often defend the individual. Examples include the Hurst case in 2004 where voting bans for prisoners were ruled in breach of the ECHR, and more recently in 2012 with the blocking of Home Office attempts to deport terror suspect Abu Qatada to Jordan. Both of these cases have proved effectively binding on Parliament and while the prisoners votes issue is still ongoing, Qatada has avoided deportation since 2001 via the courts. This shows the huge protections that judges can impart on civil liberties.

On the other hand, the sovereignty of Parliament does provide a large hindrance to the judiciary's ability to protect liberty. Acts of Parliament are binding on all bodies within the UK, including the Supreme Court. The sovereign status of Parliament puts it above the judiciary, and if a ruling is passed that the government do not like, they can always legislate to avoid the ruling. This was seen in 2005 when in response to the Belmarsh case the government passed the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. This act allowed the use of control orders which got around the judicial ruling banning detention without trial. This shows that the sovereignty of Parliament hinders the judiciary's ability to protect liberty.

In addition to this, judges cannot be pro-active in Britain and must wait for appeals to come before engaging in their protective role. The Belmarsh case of 2004 was 3 years after the original 2001 Anti Terrorism Act and was not brought until the pressure group Liberty brought the case forward in behalf of the detainees. This means that erosion of civil liberty can stand for years until someone challenges it, making the effectiveness of judges appear weak.

Finally, due to the lack of an entrenched constitution, erosion of civil liberty is very easy for the government to do, and very difficult for judges to reverse. Labour's range of anti-terror laws followed by ID cards, the DNA database and expansion of CCTV all were programs that the judges could do nothing about. The sovereignty of Parliament and the implicit nature of the liberty erosion in these bills made it impossible for the judges to overturn any of these provisions, even though they constitute a clear breach of privacy and liberty. The fact that it took subsequent acts of Parliament to overturn these measures shows that while judges can act like an irritation, if Parliament is resolved it can do anything, including scrap the Human Rights Act. This hinders the effectiveness of the judiciary to protect liberty, because if they had outright power to strike down laws like the US Supreme Court, the protection would be far more extensive and effective.

In conclusion, it is clear from the evidence that on a day to day basis rights are generally fairly and effectively protected by the judiciary. The national debate over whether judges have too much power in backlash to the Abu Qatada situation is evidence that in fact judges do effectively protect civil liberties. However, with the drawbacks highlighted, all it takes is for a resolved Parliament to decide national security is under threat for them to erode liberty at will, with the judges powerless to strike down law. For this reason, there remains an underlying ineffectiveness in what the judges can do to protect liberty in the UK.

A grade ' A' essay- which was written in timed conditions over 45 minutes

How well are  rights are protected by:

Legislation/parliament: .

During the pandemic laws were passed with limited scrutiny . At the start of the crisis, the Coronavirus Act formed the central part of the government’s response to COVID-19. The Act was passed by Parliament in just 4 working days, in March 2020. The speed at which it was passed might suggest that it was subjected to relatively little parliamentary scrutiny, demonstrating the strength of the executive. The Act has given the government an enormous range of powers, largely to impose new regulations in response to COVID-19. These can be introduced without parliament scrutiny.  

Even in non pandemic time Parliament is dominated by the executive. How well does Parliament fulfill its functions?

Human Rights Act  

Pressure groups . 

Case study liberty, case study amnesty.

Case study : The Electoral Reform Society and voter ID  

Case study : Liberty and vaccine passports  

Case study : the 3million and local voting rights for EU citizens  

The Constitution 

 The Supreme Court has been seen as a ‘missed opportunity’ by those who favour more radical reform, particularly by those who call for an entrenched bill of rights  

Freedom of Information Act

Human Rights Act

Criticisms of the Constitution  

Party Discipline and Elective Dictatorship  

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Civil Rights — Human rights in the UK’s constitution

Human Rights in The UK's Constitution

• Categories: Civil Rights Constitution

About this sample

Words: 2011 |

11 min read

Published: Sep 4, 2018

Words: 2011 | Pages: 4 | 11 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues Law, Crime & Punishment

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 788 words

3 pages / 1298 words

4 pages / 1837 words

2 pages / 1011 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Civil Rights

Higher education is regarded as a privilege for many individuals, as it opens doors to opportunities and possibilities that are not available to the majority. However, not all students are created equal, and the same can be said [...]

One of Gwendolyn Brooks' most famous poems, "Kitchenette Building," delves into the complexities and struggles of life in a cramped urban apartment. Through vivid imagery and rich language, Brooks conveys the hardships faced by [...]

In his influential speech, "The World House," Martin Luther King Jr. transcends the boundaries of race and nationality to advocate for a unified global community. Adopting a humanistic approach, King emphasizes the [...]

Guns have become a highly controversial topic in today's society, with ongoing debates on whether or not they should be banned. Proponents of gun control argue that stricter regulations and even a ban on firearms could lead to a [...]

The Reconstruction era was a tumultuous period in the history of the United States. The Union victory during the Civil War in 1865 awarded African American slaves their freedom. During this time, it appeared as though the freed [...]

American presidents have experienced both successes and failures throughout history, leaving a lasting impact on the nation and its citizens. While economic prosperity, civil rights advancements, and foreign policy achievements [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Accessibility

All popular browsers allow zooming in and out by pressing the Ctrl (Cmd in OS X) and + or - keys. Or alternatively hold down the Ctrl key and scroll up or down with the mouse.

Line height

• Amnesty International UK

What is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

The UDHR is an enduring commitment to prevent the bleakest moments in history from happening again.

'The UDHR is living proof that a global vision for human rights is possible, doable, workable.' Agnes Callamard's   keynote address to Amnesty International’s 2023 Global Assembly

When was the UDHR created?

The UDHR emerged from the ashes of war and the horrors of the Holocaust. The traumatic events of the Second World War brought home that human rights are not always universally respected. The extermination of almost 17 million people during the Holocaust, including 6 million Jews, horrified the entire world. After the war, governments worldwide made a concerted effort to foster international peace and prevent conflict. This resulted in the establishment of the United Nations in June 1945.

On 10 December 1948 , the General Assembly of the United Nations announced the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) - 30 rights and freedoms that belong to all of us. Seven decades on and the rights they included continue to form the basis for all international human rights law .

On 10 December 2023 we are celebrating the UDHR's 75th anniversary, reflecting on the enduring power of these principles to inspire positive change worldwide.

Who created the UDHR?

In 1948, representatives from the 50 member states of the United Nations came together, with  Eleanor Roosevelt (First Lady of the United States 1933-1945) chairing the Human Rights Commission, to devise a list of all the human rights that everybody across the world should enjoy. Her famous 1958 speech captures why  human rights are for every one of us, in all parts of our daily lives :

'Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home - so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighbourhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman, and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerted citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world.' Eleanor Roosevelt, 1958, during a speech at the United Nations called ‘Where Do Human Rights Begin?’

Hansa Mehta was the delegate of India, and the only other female delegate to the Commission. She is credited with changing the phrase "All men are born free and equal" to "All human beings are born free and equal" in the Declaration.

Various delegations contributed to the writing of the Declaration, ensuring the UDHR promised human rights for all, without distinction. The Egyptian delegate confirmed the universality principle, while women delegates from India, Brazil and the Dominican Republic disrupted the proceedings to ensure the gender equality. Other delegations disrupted the attempts by the Belgium, France and UK delegations to weaken provisions against racial discrimination. 

'That’s why we celebrate the UDHR, not because of who wrote it into history, but because of those who used it to disrupt history.' Agnes Callamard's   keynote address to Amnesty International’s 2023 Global Assembly

Why is the UDHR important?

The UDHR marked an important shift by daring to say that all human beings are free and equal, regardless of colour, creed or religion. For the first time, a global agreement put human beings, not power politics, at the heart of its agenda . Communities, movements and nations across the world took the UDHR disruptive power to drive forward liberation struggles and demands for equality.

Although it is not legally binding, the protection of the rights and freedoms set out in the Declaration has been incorporated into many national constitutions and domestic legal frameworks. All states have a duty, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems, to promote and protect all human rights for everyone without discrimination.

Our human rights in the UK

The UDHR has three principles: universality, indivisibility and interdependency

• Universal : this means it it applies to all people, in all countries around the world. There can be no distinction of any kind: including race, colour, sex, sexual orientation or gender identity, language, religion, political or any other opinion, national or social origin, of birth or any other situation
• Indivisible : this means that tking away one right has a negative impact on all the other rights
• Interdependent : this means that all of the 30 articles in the Declaration are equally important. Nobody can decide that some are more important than others.

A summary of the 30 articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The 30 rights and freedoms set out in the UDHR include the right to asylum , the right to freedom from torture , the right to free speech and the right to education . It includes civil and political rights, like the right to life , liberty , free speech and privacy . It also includes economic, social and cultural rights, like the right to social security , health and education .

Buy this illustrated collection for children

What are the UDHR articles?

Article 1 : We are all born free. We all have our own thoughts and ideas and we should all be treated the same way.

Article 2 : The rights in the UDHR belong to everyone, no matter who we are, where we’re from, or whatever we believe.

Article 3 : We all have the right to life, and to live in freedom and safety.

Article 4 : No one should be held as a slave, and no one has the right to treat anyone else as their slave.

Article 5 : No one has the right to inflict torture, or to subject anyone else to cruel or inhuman treatment.

Article 6 : We should all have the same level of legal protection whoever we are, and wherever in the world we are.

Article 7 : The law is the same for everyone, and must treat us all equally.

Article 8 : We should all have the right to legal support if we are treated unfairly.

Article 9 : Nobody should be arrested, put in prison, or sent away from our country unless there is good reason to do so.

Article 10 : Everyone accused of a crime has the right to a fair and public trial, and those that try us should be independent and not influenced by others.

Article 11 : Everyone accused of a crime has the right to be considered innocent until they have fairly been proven to be guilty.

Article 12 : Nobody has the right to enter our home, open our mail, or intrude on our families without good reason. We also have the right to be protected if someone tries to unfairly damage our reputation.

Article 13 : We all have the right to move freely within our country, and to visit and leave other countries when we wish.

Article 14 : If we are at risk of harm we have the right to go to another country to seek protection.

Article 15 : We all have the right to be a citizen of a country and nobody should prevent us, without good reason, from being a citizen of another country if we wish.

Article 16 : We should have the right to marry and have a family as soon as we’re legally old enough. Our ethnicity, nationality and religion should not stop us from being able to do this. Men and women have the same rights when they are married and also when they’re separated. We should never be forced to marry. The government has a responsibility to protect us and our family.

Article 17 : Everyone has the right to own property, and no one has the right to take this away from us without a fair reason.

Article 18 : Everyone has the freedom to think or believe what they want, including the right to religious belief. We have the right to change our beliefs or religion at any time, and the right to publicly or privately practise our chosen religion, alone or with others.

Article 19 : Everyone has the right to their own opinions, and to be able to express them freely. We should have the right to share our ideas with who we want, and in whichever way we choose.

Article 20 : We should all have the right to form groups and organise peaceful meetings. Nobody should be forced to belong to a group if they don’t want to.

Article 21 : We all have the right to take part in our country’s political affairs either by freely choosing politicians to represent us, or by belonging to the government ourselves. Governments should be voted for by the public on a regular basis, and every person’s individual vote should be secret. Every individual vote should be worth the same.

Article 22 : The society we live in should help every person develop to their best ability through access to work, involvement in cultural activity, and the right to social welfare. Every person in society should have the freedom to develop their personality with the support of the resources available in that country.

Article 23 : We all have the right to employment, to be free to choose our work, and to be paid a fair salary that allows us to live and support our family. Everyone who does the same work should have the right to equal pay, without discrimination. We have the right to come together and form trade union groups to defend our interests as workers.

Article 24 : Everyone has the right to rest and leisure time. There should be limits on working hours, and people should be able to take holidays with pay.

Article 25 : We all have the right to enough food, clothing, housing and healthcare for ourselves and our families. We should have access to support if we are out of work, ill, elderly, disabled, widowed, or can’t earn a living for reasons outside of our control. An expectant mother and her baby should both receive extra care and support. All children should have the same rights when they are born.

Article 26 : Everyone has the right to education. Primary schooling should be free. We should all be able to continue our studies as far as we wish. At school we should be helped to develop our talents, and be taught an understanding and respect for everyone’s human rights. We should also be taught to get on with others whatever their ethnicity, religion, or country they come from. Our parents have the right to choose what kind of school we go to.

Article 27 : We all have the right to get involved in our community’s arts, music, literature and sciences, and the benefits they bring. If we are an artist, a musician, a writer or a scientist, our works should be protected and we should be able to benefit from them.

Article 28 : We all have the right to live in a peaceful and orderly society so that these rights and freedoms can be protected, and these rights can be enjoyed in all other countries around the world.

Article 29 : We have duties to the community we live in that should allow us to develop as fully as possible. The law should guarantee human rights and should allow everyone to enjoy the same mutual respect.

Article 30 : No government, group or individual should act in a way that would destroy the rights and freedoms of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Order our free poster of the Declaration

*  Your information will be held securely by Amnesty International United Kingdom Section – a limited company registered in England (01735872), and Amnesty International UK Section Charitable Trust - a charity registered in England & Wales (1051681) and in Scotland (SC039534).

You can change how you hear from us at any time by clicking on the unsubscribe link in our emails or by emailing [email protected] . 

At Amnesty International UK, we believe you have the right to privacy and we take our responsibility for defending that right seriously. We will never sell or swap your personal information with anyone else. To find out more about how we use your information, please read our privacy notice.  

• What are human rights?
• What is the Human Rights Act?
• Human rights law

While you’re here…

Like you, we are horrified by the violence and the civilian death toll in Gaza, Israel and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We’re calling for an immediate ceasefire by all parties in the occupied Gaza Strip and Israel to prevent further loss of civilian lives. Amnesty International is investigating mass summary killings, indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks, hostage-taking, and siege tactics.

As ever, our mission to protect human rights remains. Please donate today to help expose war crimes and protect human rights. Thank you.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The European Convention on Human Rights, the EU and the UK: Confronting a Heresy

2013, European Journal of International Law

Related Papers

Tanja Karakamisheva-Jovanovska

Although there are numerous dilemmas, analyses and considerations concerning the EU's accession to the ECHR, the most general position is that it represents a huge step ahead in the development of the human rights within the EU, and issue to which the EU has been paying significant importance since the early seventies of the last century. Namely, the first general reference to the ECtHR can be found in the Nold case of 1973, as well as in the Rutili decision , further confirmed in Johnston and Heylens . The emergence and development of human rights protection in the Union must be attributed to a large extent to the ECJ’s “activist” case law, and to its gradual judicial dialogue with the ECtHR (Harpaz, 2009, 32, 126). It was only in the late eighties that EU Member States started considering the insertion of human rights provision in EU primary law (Rodean, 2012). The Single European Act (1986) contained a reference to human rights (and to the ECHR), at least in its preamble. The Amsterdam Treaty (1997) referred to respect for human rights as of the principles on which the Union is founded, and in 2000, the EU adopted its own comprehensive catalogue of human rights. Today, this practically unanimously confirmed need for EU's joining to the ECHR finds its legal grounds in the Article 59, paragraph 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which says that: "The EU can join this Convention", and in context of the Protocol 14 of the ECHR, put into force on 1 June 2010. Although the fundamental rights, as a general principle of the European Community Law, i.e. the EU Law, are recognised and enjoy protection by the European Court of Justice of the EU, already in 1960, through the known cases of Stauder and International Handelsgesellschaft , it is still considered that it was with the Lisbon Treaty that the EU provided maximum protection of these rights. Namely, according to this Treaty, and in accordance with the EU Charter for Fundamental Rights, the human rights are more deeply and more profoundly determined as EU's core and essential values. The new establishment of the protection of the fundamental rights in Europe opened important issues and dilemmas about the relations between the EU legal order, the EU Charter and the European Court of Justice on one hand, and the ECHR, and the European Court of Human Rights case law, on the other. This paper will analyse the current issues related with the recent negative opinion issued by the ECJ concerning the draft-agreement for the EU accession to the ECHR despite the vast consensus for its acceptance by the Member States and by the European institutions that were present at the hearing on 5-6 May 2014. The debate on the role of the ECHR in EU law, and on the possible accession of the EU to the Convention, has actually intensified throughout the EU integration process.

Danilo Leonardi

in The EU Accession to the ECHR, V. Kosta, N. Skoutaris, V. Tzevelekos (eds.), Hart, 2014

VASILIKI KOSTA , Nikos Skoutaris , Dr Vassilis P Tzevelekos

This is the introductory chapter of an edited volume on the question of the EU Accession to the ECHR. The paper gives an overview of the normative environment surrounding the accession of the EU to the ECHR, and explains the aims, structure and limits of the book. It argues that the accession will represent a major change in the relationship between two organisations that have co-operated closely in the past, though the ECHR has exercised only an indirect constitutional control over the EU legal order through scrutiny of EU Member States. The accession of the EU to the ECHR is expected to put an end to the informal dialogue, and allegedly also competition between the two regimes in Europe and to establish formal (both normative and institutional) hierarchies. In this new era, some old problems will be solved and new ones will appear. Beyond the co-respondent mechanism and CJEU's prior involvement, questions of autonomy and independence, of attribution and allocation of responsibility, of co-operation, and legal pluralism will arise, with consequences for the protection of human rights in Europe.

Andrzej Drzemczewski

Tamas Gyorfi

The purpose of the present paper is threefold. First, my ambition is to improve the analytical framework that is used to assess the legitimacy of the European Court of Human Rights. The Court’s authority can neither be established nor refuted by a single master-argument. Instead, what we need is a careful balancing exercise and this piece aims to set out the main elements of the justificatory equation. Second, using this framework, I intend to put forward the outline of a coherent critique of the European human rights regime. Third, I hope that my paper is able to shed light on why it is natural to expect more vocal criticism from the United Kingdom than from most other member states of the Council of Europe.

Kyle Greene

Simon Bronitt

Nicolas Meier

European Constitutional Law Review

Prof Dr W O L F G A N G Weiß

Though the Treaty of Lisbon mentions the European Human Rights Convention in different contexts, it revalued its legal significance for the EU. By virtue of its Article 52, the Fundamental Rights Charter partly incorporated the European Convention. The partial incorporation challenges the human rights standards currently granted in the practice of EU law, which unfolds challenges to and consequences for the interpretation, application and relevance of human rights within the EU’s legal order. Since the partial incorporation of the European Convention includes the Strasbourg case law, the autonomy of the EU’s legal order is affected. The new importance of the Convention also engenders changes to its role within the domestic legal orders of the EU Member States.

Social Science Research Network

Emma McClean

As a working paper, it reflects on the interplay between the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the Human Rights Act (HRA) as human rights laws protecting human rights in the UK. It is centred on the premise that the interplay is one of a relationship between international law and domestic law, specifically the implementation of international law via a domestic statute

RELATED PAPERS

Irma Ahyati

International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology

ANTONIO RAHAL JUNIOR

Zapata España

Physical Review A

Silvia Ledesma

اتجاهات الشباب في دول مجلس التعاون

jaber al ali

Occupational Therapy: the Official Journal of the Association of Occupational Therapists

Violetta Raffay

tika astriani

Toto Gronlund

Arch Neurocien ( …

Guillermo Axayacalt Gutierrez Aceves

Academy of Accounting and Financial Studies Journal

shrafat ali sair

European Journal of Technic

Sermin Ozan

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

T. Ramachandra

Jurnal Dakwah

International Research Journal of Medicine and Medical Sciences

fatimah zahra

International Journal of Learning and Media

Shelia R Cotten

INCAS BULLETIN

Mahmoud Mamou

West Indian Medical Journal

Daniel Udofia

Neuromodulation

Dillon Leung

Siddique Ehsan

International Journal of Molecular Sciences

Md Amit Hasan

PsycEXTRA Dataset

Noraini Noor

Simon Archer

childhood & philosophy

Beatriz Corsino Perez

Munkácsy egyik nagyheti képe: Krisztus Pilátus előtt

Miklós SZABÓ

Fabrizio Bigotti

See More Documents Like This

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

U.K. Backsliding on Civil and Political Protections, U.N. Rights Body Says

A human rights committee that examined a range of concerns called on Britain to abandon its controversial plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda.

By Nick Cumming-Bruce

Reporting from Geneva

An influential United Nations human rights body delivered a scathing assessment Thursday on the protection of civil rights in Britain, accusing the Conservative government of backsliding and urging the country to abandon its controversial legislation to send asylum seekers to Rwanda.

The criticisms from the U.N. Human Rights Committee came as it presented its conclusions from two days of meetings in Geneva this month with a delegation of 24 British officials to review the country’s compliance with an international treaty for the protection of civil and political rights.

“We are witnessing a really regressive trend and trajectory” in Britain, Hélène Tigroudja, a committee member, said at a news conference in Geneva. She said that the trend was occurring “in many, many sectors when dealing with civil and political rights, and I hope our message will be heard by the U.K.”

The 18-person U.N. committee addressed wide-ranging concerns over the two days. Britain is one of more than 170 countries that ratified the treaty — the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights — and member states go through periods of review. The committee’s conclusions are generally taken seriously, but it does not have the power to impose sanctions.

The committee called on Britain to “swiftly repeal” provisions of a law passed last year to try to curb illegal migration and a fiercely contested bill in Parliament that would send asylum seekers to the East African country of Rwanda.

Noting that Britain’s Supreme Court had ruled that the bill violated international law , the committee said it deprived asylum seekers of their most basic rights.

“These texts exemplify the regressive trend experienced in the U.K.,” Ms. Tigroudja, a French professor of international law, said in a written comment, “and not only on the exercise of civil and political rights, but also on respect for the rule of law, of the judiciary and basic humanity principles enshrined in the 1951 Geneva Convention on the status of refugees.”

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of Britain has made curbing the arrival of migrants and asylum seekers by small boats a flagship policy of his government as it prepares for an election expected this year. And a spokesperson for the British government said in an emailed statement on Thursday that the country was “committed to the Safety of Rwanda Bill, which will help stop illegal migration to the U.K., dismantle the people smuggling gangs and save lives.”

The Conservative government has argued that the best way to stop the arrival of undocumented migrants and asylum seekers is to ensure they cannot remain in the country, and that asylum seekers could continue to challenge their deportation.

The U.N. committee also took issue with Britain’s counterterrorism legislation and warned that proposed amendments to laws governing intelligence agencies’ scrutiny of information could allow overly broad government collection of personal data.

The committee said that an anti-protest law passed last year, the Public Order Act 2023 , imposed “serious and undue restrictions” on the right of peaceful assembly and criminalized some forms of peaceful protest by Britons. It said that it was deeply concerned by the excessive use of the act to restrict civic space and that law enforcement agencies should end the use of facial recognition and mass surveillance technologies at protests.

The committee also expressed concern over a law passed last year to address the legacy of violent conflict in Northern Ireland that allows conditional immunity from prosecution for people who committed serious crimes and human rights abuses, and a law passed three years ago that sets a time limit on legal action against military personnel arising from overseas operations.

The laws raised longstanding questions about the lack of investigations into allegations of torture or prosecutions for war crimes and other abuses, Ms. Tigroudja noted. “We put this in the conversation because it’s really a serious concern,” she said.

The British government spokesperson said in the statement on Thursday that “the Legacy Act seeks to put in place effective information recovery for victims and families, while complying with our international obligations.”

British officials have said that the legislation on overseas military operations left open the possibility of prosecution in all cases, subject to the discretion of the prosecutor.

“We cannot say we are satisfied by this general answer,” Ms. Tigroudja said.

Ms. Tigroudja said the committee was particularly concerned about the laws that limited the possibility of investigating or prosecuting serious human rights abuses committed during the conflict in Northern Ireland or by British military personnel in overseas operations. The committee said that Britain should repeal or amend both laws.

Stephen Castle contributed reporting from London.

Nick Cumming-Bruce reports from Geneva, covering the United Nations, human rights and international humanitarian organizations. Previously he was the Southeast Asia reporter for The Guardian for 20 years and the Bangkok bureau chief of The Wall Street Journal Asia. More about Nick Cumming-Bruce

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

• International
• Foreign affairs

UN Human Rights Council 55: UK Statement on OHCHR report on Ukraine

Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner on the OHCHR report findings on the human rights situation in Ukraine. Delivered by the UK's Permanent Representative to WTO and UN, Simon Manley.

Thank you, Mr Vice President and good morning, Deputy High Commissioner.

As your Office’s latest report highlights, we continue to see consistent violations of international human rights and humanitarian law committed by the Russian Federation in Ukrainian territory.

Many Ukrainians living under Russian control have endured violence, Russification, and the suppression of their own identity.

It is clear from the Commission of Inquiry that Russia’s war on Ukraine has been underpinned by the systematic and widespread use of torture against Ukrainian prisoners of war and civilians. 

Your Office’s latest report documents horrific sexual violence both inside and outside of detention.

In parallel, in areas Russia has seized, the very foundations of Ukrainian society have been replaced by Russian systems which seek to quash rather than protect the rights of Ukrainian civilians. 

Ukrainians have been completely denied their own culture. Language, history, and even nationalities are being rewritten to reflect a distorted version of reality.

Russia cultivates a climate of fear and surveillance as it can only rule through subjugation and control. But the Ukrainian people will continue to resist, and these communities will rebuild. Putin will not win. Ukraine will prevail.

Russia must pay for the crimes it has committed. And the United Kingdom will stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.

Invasion of Ukraine

• UK visa support for Ukrainian nationals
• Move to the UK if you're coming from Ukraine
• Homes for Ukraine: record your interest
• Find out about the UK’s response

Is this page useful?

• Yes this page is useful
• No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. We’ll send you a link to a feedback form. It will take only 2 minutes to fill in. Don’t worry we won’t send you spam or share your email address with anyone.

Who were the World Central Kitchen aid workers killed in Gaza by Israel?

SAIFEDDIN ISSAM AYAD ABUTAHA, PALESTINIAN

Lalzawmi "zomi" frankcom, australia.

DAMIAN SOBOL, POLAND

James kirby, john chapman, james henderson, uk.

JACOB FLICKINGER, UNITED STATES AND CANADA

The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.

Reporting by Lewis Jackson and Alasdair Pal in Sydney; Farouq Suleiman in London; Editing by Michael Perry, Ros Russell and Gareth Jones

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. , opens new tab

Mexico suspends relations with Ecuador after arrest of ex-VP

Glas, convicted twice for corruption, was holed up in the embassy since seeking political asylum in December, a request Mexico granted earlier on Friday.