•The Act has effectively incorporated the convention in to UK law. Whereas in the past you had to go to the European court in Strasbourg to seek a remedy under the convention, the Human Rights Act 1998 was designed to “bring home” the convention, enabling people to use it directly within UK courts. This could potentially have an enormous effect on the development of case law in the UK. From now on, wherever possible, courts must interpret both existing and future legislation so as to be compatible with articles of the convention. If the courts are unable to do this, then they must enforce the legislation anyway and issue a “declaration of incompatibility” that the legislation is inconsistent. But many commentators believe that judges will be reluctant to do this, and more inclined to interpret the law – and alter its literal meaning if necessary - so as to be consistent with the convention.
•The Act could have a big influence on future judicial interpretation of public order law. Articles 10 and 11 of the convention assert the rights of everyone to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly respectively. These are not unlimited rights, of course, and the government may impose legislative restrictions on them for the prevention of crime, public disorder etc. But these restrictions imposed have to be proportionate to the objective being sought i.e. public disorder, crime. And if the police interpret the legislation in a way which is disproportionate to that objective, then they have acted illegally and can be sued.
•Anyone who goes on animal rights demos these days will be familiar with the Section 12 and 14 orders which the police routinely use to control marches and assemblies. This legislation in itself is not incompatible with the convention. It is supposedly designed to balance the rights of protestors to demonstrate with the rights of others to go about their normal business and to be protected from crime. But nowadays the police are clearly abusing their powers under Section 14, so as to negate entirely the effect of a demonstration. If you can show this to be the case then you can use it as a defence when charged with breaching a Section 12 or 14 order, namely that the order was unlawful under Section 6 of the Act.
•Similarly in the case of Section 42 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001, the police are currently abusing the discretion granted by them in the legislation. As a result, a large number of protestors are now suing the police under Section 6 of the Act.
•Other police powers have also already been affected by the incorporation of the convention in to UK legislation. For example, the High Court has ruled that it is illegal for the police to detain prisoners held in custody for breach of the peace, where there are no grounds for suspecting that they will cause a further breach when they are released. And it has also been ruled that the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 should not be used to stifle legitimate protest, as this would be incompatible with Article 10 of the convention.
back to index 