Rafael Behr correctly identifies the government’s threat to replace the Human Rights Act with a bill of rights as “government by gesture and culture war provocation” (Inane and Orwellian: a Queen’s speech to improve the life of Boris Johnson, 10 May). The Human Rights Act incorporates the rights set out in the European convention on human rights. Jack Straw MP, home secretary when it was introduced in 1998, referred to it as “bringing rights home”. No new rights were created, but thereafter British citizens could pursue them in our own courts instead of making the journey to Strasbourg. That route remains available because the government has committed itself to our remaining party to the convention.
The government’s independent Human Rights Act review, chaired by the retired lord justice of appeal Sir Peter Gross, reported on 14 December 2021. It found that the act was working well and there was no case for its repeal. Ignoring this advice, Dominic Raab issued a consultation paper on his bill of rights proposal, which met almost total rejection from those who responded.
Why persist with a change that would only weaken the public’s right to challenge abuse? Behr gives us the answer: “Downing Street is convinced that public opinion on law and order permits strides to the authoritarian right well beyond the boundaries of conventional Westminster consensus.”
In this case, Downing Street must surely admit its mistake and withdraw the threat.
Geoffrey Bindman
London
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication.
