AT LAST some sense has been written by the Government about the Human Rights Act. In his review of the implementation of the Act, the Lord Chancellor has concluded that it has had a “significant, but beneficial, effect upon the development of policy by central Government”.

The review comes when the Act has been blamed for all manner of social and political ills, and David Cameron, the Conservative Party leader, has suggested that it be replaced by a British bill of rights. And the general conclusion it reaches is that the Act is a force for good.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton states that the decisions of the courts under the Act have had no effect on the fight against crime or on development of the criminal law. He recognises the impact that the Act has had on counter-terrorism measures the Government has wished to implement, but says that is because the Act is necessarily based on judgments from the European Court of Human Rights which would remain in place in any event.

The review recognises that the Act has led to “better policy outcomes” by ensuring that the needs of a diverse population are considered. It says that the Act promotes “greater personalisation and therefore better public services”. I think that the Lord Chancellor means that public authorities have to consider the impact that policies will have on the everyday lives of ordinary people and act accordingly. He sees litigation under the Act as possibly leading to beneficial changes in policy. This is perhaps best seen in the improvements in mental health policy forced by cases brought under the Act.

The Lord Chancellor attacks the “myths and misperceptions” that have built up about the Act. He places the partial blame for this on poor reporting, which often concentrates on the launching of bizarre “human rights” cases but does not report when a case is “effectively laughed out of court”.

The review points out the overarching duty of the European Convention (enshrined in the Act) to maintain the safety and security of all the people in the UK. To this end urgent training and advice programmes will be provided to public authorities and frontline staff will be provided with updated guidance on human rights, emphasising the need for public safety.

But perhaps most importantly, the Lord Chancellor thinks that there is an urgent need for the public to be better informed about the benefits of the Act for ordinary people. He points out that Britain played a leading role in drawing up the European Convention after the Second World War. It is surely odd that the rights defined are routinely attacked in this country. Instead we should be proud of defending, upholding and promoting these rights for everyone in the UK, and the Lord Chancellor should be praised for taking a stand on the issue.

Stephen Cragg is a barrister specialising in public law at Doughty Street Chambers. E-mail: s.cragg@doughtystreet.co.uk

Times Recommends

• C&G axed - 1,660 jobs to be lost
• UK house prices rise 1.1% as buyers return
• Mixed reaction to US banks repaying bailouts