The European Convention on Human Rights and the the Human Rights Act 1998

Introduction

European Convention on Human Rights

The European Convention on Human Rights is a specific document which contains different articles that suggest human rights common for all countries of the European Union. This presupposes that national laws of the countries that belong to the European Union should be based or at least take into account the articles of the European Convention on Human Rights establishing fundamental rights and freedoms of the European people.

The most common situation here is that some laws of the country cannot be considered identical to the articles of the European Convention on Human Rights or, moreover, contradict them. So, it is advisable to consider the consequences of adopting laws with a view to the articles and bases of the European Convention on Human Rights. Moreover, Article 13 was left out of the Human Rights Act 1998 and this decision had its consequences.

Discussion

Incorporation of Convention rights into English law

The English authorities have found a way to adjust English laws to the requirements of the articles introduced by the European Convention on Human Rights. This was necessary in order to prevent different misunderstandings and violation of human rights. Though the laws of the United Kingdom came under jurisdiction of the European common laws, the Human Rights Act 1998 became the most prominent change in the history of the English legislative system. The Human Rights Act 1998 influenced greatly the laws on property and different measures adopted to regulate interactions and relationships between parties concerned. However, the most burning problem of the incorporation of Convention rights into English law is the fact that the Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights was left out while compiling the Human Rights Act 1998 which became the basic English legislative document.

The Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights suggested that “Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity” (Hellenic Resources Network, 1995).

This means that the English law refuted to recognize the legitimacy of the thirteenth article of the European convention which should be considered basic in terms of rights and freedoms established by the countries that belong to the European Union.

Consequently, Article 13 was left out of the Human Rights Act 1998 which was aimed at developing relations between the United Kingdome and other numerous countries of the European Union in order not to contradict the common laws of the European Convention on Human Rights. This means that the thirteenth article of the European Convention on Human Rights was not important for English laws as it appeared in the European Convention on Human Rights.

Conclusion

The Human Rights Act 1998 was aimed at meeting the basic requirements suggested by the articles introduced by the European Convention on Human Rights. Though not all English laws could be considered appropriate and did not fit the fundamental human rights and freedoms, the Human Rights Act 1998 made it possible for English laws not to contradict the basic principles of the European Convention on Human Rights. In addition, Article 13 was left out of the English laws as it was considered inappropriate and inadequate to be included into the basic laws of the United Kingdom.

References

Hanson, H., 2003, Legal Method & Reasoning. 2^nd ed. London: Routledge Cavendish.

Hellenic Resources Network, 1995. Council Of Europe: the European Convention on Human Rights. Web.

Office of Public Sector Information, (n.d.). Human Rights Act 1998: Chapter 42. [Online] Web.