On 11 January 2023, the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee heard evidence from a number of witnesses on the implications of the Government’s Bill of Rights Bill for Northern Ireland. Witnesses included representatives from the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, the Rt Hon Baroness Hale of Richmond, and Sir Stephen Laws KC, Senior Research Fellow on Policy Exchange’s Judicial Power Project. The impact on Northern Ireland of the Bill of Rights Bill (better known as the “Rights Removal Bill”), a Bill which seeks to repeal and replace the Human Rights Act 1998 (“HRA”), was the focus of the session. As the HRA is seen to be a cornerstone of the operation of the Belfast/ Good Friday Agreement, repealing the Act could have serious consequences for peace and political stability in Northern Ireland.
The Good Friday / Belfast Agreement
Although largely speaking in favour of the Rights Removal Bill, Sir Stephen Laws KC did acknowledge that ‘there are grounds to be concerned because of the Good Friday Agreement and it is important that this Bill should proceed in a process that respects the need for discussion with special reference to Northern Ireland’.
Indeed, the Chief Commissioner stated that the public in Northern Ireland are fearful that the enactment of the Bill will mean that the ‘Good Friday Agreement is somehow being revisited or ripped up’. She also addressed the ‘comfort’ experienced by residents of Northern Ireland in knowing that ‘other states in Europe had determined the rules and the Bill of Rights changes this fundamentally.’
Both Baroness Hale and Colin Caughey remarked that under the Bill, it is not clear whether the competence of the Northern Ireland Assembly will be limited by what the UK Courts say the Convention rights mean or by what the Strasbourg courts say the Convention rights mean.
The Republic of Ireland will continue to keep pace with Strasbourg via the ECHR Act 2003 and there is therefore a real danger that, as Social Democratic & Labour Party MP Claire Hanna queried, the Bill’s proposals will create discrepancies between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
Not only does the Bill threaten the Good Friday / Belfast Agreement, in response to a question from Conservative MP Robert Goodman, Baroness Hale explained that the Bill contains a diminution of rights and is therefore also difficult to reconcile with Article 2 of the Northern Ireland Protocol which sets out the UK Government’s commitment to ‘no diminution of rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity’ in Northern Ireland.
The attached clip details Baroness Hale’s concern that the Bill ‘goes against the Good Friday Agreement’.
Access to Justice
As Baroness Hale rightly remarks, not only are there issues with the substantive implications of the Bill (positive obligations and other matters), there are a series of concerns regarding procedure and access to justice. The Bill seeks to introduce a permission stage in Clause 15, an additional hurdle for claimants seeking justice for infringements of their human rights. In light of this proposed change Baroness Hale raised the following question: ‘if you don’t have to get permission to bring proceedings for breach of your ordinary rights, why should you have to get permission for breach of your most fundamental human rights’.
The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission was similarly critical of this aspect of the Bill, with the Chief Commissioner questioning the assumption that there is currently an abuse of process which has necessitated the introduction of a permission stage.
There was also agreement from all panellists that the Bill, if enacted, will result in more cases going to Strasbourg. In light of this, Colin Caughey raised the issue of costs and time involved in exhausting remedies in the UK, while the Chief Commissioner stressed that the ECtHR is a very different jurisdiction which offers remedies that will often not satisfy claimants in the same way domestic remedies such as injunctions can.
Chair of the Committee, Simon Hoare, drew on the prediction that more cases will go to Strasbourg in querying whether this might bolster the position of those who think we should leave the ECHR, a position which has gained greater prominence in recent months, with the Justice Secretary Dominic Raab remarking that departure from the ECHR is ‘not off the table’. Baroness Hale declined to respond to the Chair’s question on this matter.
We explain what the Rights Removal Bill means for our Human Rights Act and human rights protections in the UK in our detailed briefings and guides.
We explain what the Rights Removal Bill means for our Human Rights Act and human rights protections in the UK in our detailed briefings and guides.
Find out what the Rights Removal Bill means for different communities and areas such as disability rights, ending violence against women and religion and belief.
Find out what the Rights Removal Bill means for different communities and areas such as disability rights, ending violence against women and religion and belief.
Get our key concerns with the Rights Removal Bill with these two-page guides to some of the significant changes the Bill will make to human rights in the UK.
Get our key concerns with the Rights Removal Bill with these two-page guides to some of the significant changes the Bill will make to human rights in the UK.
Stay up-to-date on our latest work on the Rights Removal Bill with our vlog series featuring different members of our team involved in our actions.
Stay up-to-date on our latest work on the Rights Removal Bill with our vlog series featuring different members of our team involved in our actions.
Read about our briefing to Parliamentarians that helped amplify the voices of people with lived experience in a House of Lords debate on the Human Rights Act.
Read about our briefing to Parliamentarians that helped amplify the voices of people with lived experience in a House of Lords debate on the Human Rights Act.
Parliamentary & Policy Assistant