Eight Myths About Human Rights

myth: human rights help wrongdoers, especially criminals and terrorists

Fact: human rights belong to everyone. For example, they are especially important to people in care, young children, people with learning difficulties, and people facing serious ill health.

myth: human rights put the safety and well-being of ordinary people at risk 

Fact: most rights are limited or qualified precisely in order to take account of public safety. Public safety concerns are built into human rights standards. For example, the right to respect for private and family life, freedom to manifest religion or belief, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association, can be, and frequently are, restricted in the interests of national security and/or public safety. Human rights allow for an appropriate balance to be reached between protecting rights and the interests of the wider community, including safety concerns. The fact that the law allows for this balance to be struck is often forgotten. 

myth: the HRA was imported from Europe, it’s not relevant here

Fact: the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was drafted in the aftermath of the Second World War under the auspices of the Council of Europe (not the EU as is often thought), with significant input from British lawyers, politicians and civil servants. It is therefore, in large part, home grown. The UK has been signed up to it for well over 50 years. 

myth: human rights are part of a left-ist agenda

Fact: human rights have had, since the Second World War, support from people across the political spectrum including Winston Churchill. Human rights are about setting very basic minimum standards which people can expect from the state – so that the dignity, self-worth and potential of every individual is respected.

 

myth: human rights are not relevant to our everyday lives 

Fact: the real power of human rights is in prevention not cure. Human rights provide a value system that can drive up standards of public service and make a difference to the lives of ordinary people. 

myth: human rights have no legal basis 

Fact: human rights have a solid basis in both international and domestic law, which has grown up over the last 60 years based on rights won over centuries. They are about creating very basic standards which the state should respect. For example, the state should ensure that children they know to be at risk are not subjected to treatment that might harm them or even result in their death. That is the state’s positive obligation – to protect life and to protect against inhuman treatment. 

myth: the HRA will bring in a right to privacy via the back door

Fact: the HRA has introduced a statutory right to free expression via Article 10 of the ECHR. This states that a court must take into account the importance of this right in any action against the media. This is supposed to strengthen the presumption in favour of free expression. Although there is a right to respect for private life, it is a qualified right, and its application should to be balanced against other rights such as the right to free expression and the needs of the wider community and state i.e. the public interest. This is an area of much debate in media circles. 

myth: the HRA gives the courts too much power over elected politicians

Fact: the HRA requires courts to interpret legislation in a way that is compatible with it. If this is not possible, the courts can issue a declaration of incompatibility. It is then up to Parliament to decide whether to change the law. The courts cannot override primary legislation on human rights grounds.

 

 

Source: Media Trust

 

Posted via email from lissping