Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
The Legal Protection of Human RightsSceptical Essays$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Tom Campbell, K.D. Ewing, and Adam Tomkins

Print publication date: 2011

Print ISBN-13: 9780199606078

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2011

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199606078.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 21 July 2019

Amateur Operatics: The Realization of Parliamentary Protection of Civil Liberties

Amateur Operatics: The Realization of Parliamentary Protection of Civil Liberties

Chapter:
(p.428) 21 Amateur Operatics: The Realization of Parliamentary Protection of Civil Liberties
Source:
The Legal Protection of Human Rights
Author(s):

Jonathan Morgan

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199606078.003.0021

This chapter combines trenchant criticism of the UK Human Rights Act 1998 and an innovative suggestion for its radical modification. The critical element concentrates on Sections 3 and 4 of the HRA and the thesis that they make for a dialogue between courts and Parliament. It then goes on to present the Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) as part of the culture of compliance in which legislatures try to predict and pre-empt adverse judicial decisions. The proposals for reform include repealing Section 4 and amending Section 3 to make it clear that interpretation cannot include distorting the meaning of the statutory language. The JCHR could then operate more politically. More radically, the chapter also suggests that there should be provision for courts to adjourn particular cases of apparent injustices arising from legislation and refer them to a new body the ‘High Court of Parliament’ which would combine investigative and judicial methods to determine the matter and, if necessary, introduce an amendment to the offending legislation.

Keywords:   UK Human Rights Act, dialogue, Joint Committee on Human Rights, interpretation, High Court of Parliament

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .