Let’s blame the Human Rights Act when the going gets tough.

5,000 foreign prisoners unable to be deported

Call me a cynic but it is intriguing to look at the way certain sectors of the media have been treating our good old Human Rights Act (HRA). You might remember me writing about the origins of the European Convention of Human Rights which is incorporated in part in our Human Rights Act – about how it grew out of the horrors of the Second World War and owes a huge deal to the struggles of British politicians and civil servants.

Well over the last year there has been a sustained attack on the Human Rights Act (1998) which allows individuals to bring a case if they consider their human rights have been breached – to a British court rather than go through the expense, trauma and time of rushing off to Strasbourg.

Certain newspapers, the Daily Mail in particular, have been campaigning to have the Human Rights Act replaced, abolished, obliterated – dependent upon the journalist. They have seen it as the root of all evil, the very manifestation of the devil instatute.

Now I was amongst the first to welcome the establishment of the Commission to examine the way the HRA has been implemented and interpreted over the decade but it strikes me as naïve politicking to use a piece of legislation and decisions that go against the political mood of the day as the be all and end of all of all things that are wrong with our country today!

Intriguingly if you were to draw a graph of when the press and media shouted the loudest it would strangely tie in with times when the present Government (and in in particular the Tory spouse of the couple) were facing political brickbats.

So faced with the riots – our PM comes out and decries the Human Rights Act. Faced with a growing campaign against the NHS and benefits changes in the week of party conference Theresa May famously hits the HRA with the tail of a cat; and today in the midst of a ‘bad week’ when the PM became the leader who had lost the most in terms of Euro scepticism we have another report in the press critical of the HRA.

Incidentally today’s report indicates that yes just under 5,000 foreign prisoners were unable to be deported. However, John Vine the Chief Inspector of immigration in an inspection Report has said that the UK Border Agency (UKBA) must do more to manage the 5,375 foreign prisoners who, having completed their sentences, have remained in detention or have been released into the community pending deportation.

In particular, according to the Guardian, Vine also warns that the UKBA would do better to take more account of human rights rulings by judges – particularly those that block deportations on the grounds of article 8 of the HRA, the right to family life – rather than wasting large sums of taxpayers’ money on a futile cycle of further appeals, even though the outcome will be that the former prisoner will be allowed to stay in Britain.

“A significant number of appeals continue to be allowed against decisions to deport, in most cases because deportation would breach the UK’s obligation to the individual under the Human Rights Act,” says the former Strathclyde chief constable. “The agency must work to reduce the number of decisions overturned on appeal and take full account of the court’s decisions in deciding whether deportation action is appropriate or whether it would breach a person’s rights under article 8.”

Intriguingly the Daily Mail reports of the same thus:

‘During the inspection, immigration officials complained to Mr Vine that British courts were interpreting Article 8 much more liberally than European Court of Human Rights judges sitting in Strasbourg.

Worryingly, the Government lost one in three human rights cases which went to appeal.’

So no mention of Mr Vine’s criticism just Border staff complaining – and there’s a surprise given that Mr Vine argues they haven’t been doing their job properly – blame someone else.

So as is entirely politically appropriate the immigration minister, Damian Green, has indicated that changes will be made to the system to re-interpret article 8.

“For too long, article 8 has been used to place the family rights of foreign criminals above the rights of the British public, which is why we will change the immigration rules to ensure a better balance,” said Green.

So a health warning should be attached to all stories on the human rights Act in the media – Beware of bias – including this author.

I for my tuppence would rather think of the people who having suffered indignity and abuse have used the HRA to gain that dignity in their social care, care at home or hospital care. I would rather think of those who have used the HRA to ensure that their rights to religious expression have been protected. I would rather think of those who have used the HRA to challenge their false and illegal imprisonment under mental health orders and so on.

I think this will run and run especially when certain political parties are finding it hot in the Westminster kitchen.

Leave us your views we would be delighted to hear them.

Dr Donald Macaskill

www.equalanddiverse.co.uk

Related articles:

Human rights trending on Twitter.

We need dignity in our health care