Human rights law ‘is distorting democracy’
Academic calls for changes to ‘misused’ Act to prevent judges from interfering with running the country
THE Human Rights Act has been “misused” by judges and should be amended to prevent it undermining the ability of ministers to govern, a leading Oxford University academic has said.
In a paper published today, Prof Richard Ekins claims human rights legislation has become an “engine” that is “driving judicial interference” in “parliamentary democracy and responsible government.”
Writing for the Policy Exchange think tank, Prof Ekins says that the 1998 Human Rights Act (HRA) has contributed to the expansion of judicial power and the courts encroaching on issues traditionally left to Parliament.
He argues that a “complex” of domestic and European law, overseen by the European Court of Human Rights, has distorted the UK’S “system of parliamentary government” and encouraged activists to wage “politics by other means”.
Prof Ekins, head of Policy Exchange’s “Judicial Power Project”, adds that the frequent updating of these rights by the European court has “armed claimants” with the ability to “obstruct” governments from taking action in areas such as immigration, border control and military action. The paper also calls for ministers to consider legislating to limit the scope and grounds for launching a judicial review.
It calls on Boris Johnson to pass a new Constitutional Restoration Act which would clarify that key prerogatives, such as proroguing Parliament, cannot be interfered with by the courts.
The law would effectively “reverse the effects” of the Supreme Court’s ruling earlier this year that Mr Johnson had unlawfully suspended Parliament, as well as making clear that MPS rather than judges are the “guardians of the constitution”. Prof Ekins also recommends that the court be renamed, and that ministers have more involvement in the appointment of justices.
It comes just hours after Lady Hale, the outgoing president of the Supreme Court, warned against any attempt by ministers to “politicise” the judiciary after a series of controversial rulings. Lady Hale claimed that it would be a “very great shame” if the UK established political appointments.
However, in a foreword to the Policy
Exchange paper, the former Conservative leader Lord Howard, QC, writes that “judges should recognise that ministers have a duty to govern in the public interest and should not disarm them from exercising powers that Parliament has chosen to confer.”
The paper is likely to be welcomed by the Prime Minister, who has pledged to update the Human Rights Act amid growing concern among Tory MPS over its impact on national security and the ability of ministers to deport extremists and violent criminals.