Scrapping Human Rights Act could ruin devolution
By Alexis Alison
Replacing the 1997 Human Rights Act (HRA) with a new British Bill of Rights will impose severe complications on devolution in UK, according to a leading legal expert’s predictions.
In a move likely to damage David Cameron’s attempts to extract Britain from the HRA’s jurisdiction, a report by JUSTICE director Roger Smith today questioned whether reforming the law was possible without damaging the UK’s pre-existing constitutional arrangements.
“This is likely to prove a legal and political nightmare,” Mr Smith said.
“The devolution settlement is incredibly complex. The consent of the devolved parliaments – certainly practically and probably constitutionally – will also be required.
“This is not a project in which Westminster can go it alone,” he added.
The HRA and the devolution statutes, both part of an extended period of legal and constitutional forms in the late 1990s, are deeply intertwined, Mr Smith argued.
Statutes on devolution incorporated aspects of the HRA, and any attempt to alter the European legislation could therefore have consequences on the devolution process.
The report expressed concerns over the government’s ability to secure consent from the Scottish parliament and the assemblies in Wales and Northern Ireland, while respecting their independent power.
Mr Cameron has already appointed a panel of lawyers to tackle the challenges of drafting a British Bill of Rights as an alternative to the HRA, which many Tories believe hinders the fight against crime and terrorism.
The Tory leader remains committed to scrapping the current legislation entirely.
