The Role of Courts in Securing Human Rights under the Human Rights Act 1998

Running head: ESSAY 0
human rights law
JANUARY 9, 2019

ESSAY 1
The human right is the fundamental right and independence that relate to every person
everywhere in all over the world, from starting to the end. They apply nonetheless of where
an individual is make, what is deliberated by the individual, or how an individual select to live
the life. They would never be involved; however, they can sometimes be restricted, for an
instance if a person breaches the law, rules, and regulations, or in interest of national
security. These basic rights are depended on the shared value like self-respect, objectivity,
equality, esteem, and independence. These beliefs are well described and protected by
laws, rules, and regulations. In United Kingdom, the human rights are secured by the Human
Rights Act 1998. The aim was to include in United Kingdom law the rights covered in
the European Convention on Human Rights. The Human Rights Act 1998 creates the
remedy for the violation of the agreement rights available in the court of United Kingdom,
without any requirement to go to the human rights courts1. In the following parts, the role of
the courts in the security of human rights on the basis of Human Rights Act 1998 is critically
discussed and examined.
Addressing the Human Rights Act 1998 meant that court of the United Kingdom could look
at the European Court Human Rights. The Human Rights Act 1998 took the rights home,
and countless daily orders such as domestic violence matter above, creating United
Kingdom better without expensive procedure of courts. The Human Rights Act works in three
main ways-
1. All laws of United Kingdom must be harmonious with human rights as per the Human
Rights Act 1998
It means that whether making the new laws or relating the human rights of old people must
be measured. In this manner, the Human Rights Act 1998 respects the democratic
procedures and the legal doctrines. This admires the legal principles of parliamentary
dominion that means if law is mismatched with the human right, this is the duty of
management and the assembly to determine whether to reconsider at the issues. The court
1Michael Freeman, Human rights. (John Wiley & Sons, 2017)

ESSAY 2
of United Kingdom does not have the powers or the authorities to undermine the laws and
Parliament Acts2.
2. Communal authority has the legal obligation to act compatibly with the human rights
in all authorities ensure
In the simple meaning, the legal obligation refers that these officials should respect, secure
and accomplish the human rights of people in the work, involving supply of the services,
procedures, decision-taking and so on. This obligation contains the federal government and
the communal consultants, which persons communicate with each day, involving the
institutes of state, NHS clinics, common assemblies, police officer, caring home and other
common services. It is significant because this creates the differences for daily life of people
and without going to the courts3.
3. In the case where the laws or public official risks the human right any individual may
now ask court of United Kingdom and tribunal to consider the circumstances-
It means that an individual may go to the domestic courts and ask them to look at whether
the human rights are at risks or have desecrated4. Applying does not mean this would
develop to the judicial matter, the court would first determine if this is allowable. Before the
Human Rights Act 1998, the court of United Kingdom may not determine the challenges;
individuals had make efforts and go to the ECHR5.
The Human Rights Bill required stabling the independence of the parliament and the proper
security of the rights, depending on the legitimate remedies and governmental remedies for
the offenders of the contraventions. At the same time as the possibly main constitutional
effects and legal effect of human rights bill that created it extremely debated from starting in
the media, were partially concealed by extremely‐practical enlisting, member of both houses
2 Amartya Sen, "Elements of a theory of human rights." In Justice and the Capabilities Approach, pp. 221-262.
(Routledge 2017).
3 David Forsythe, Human rights in international relations (Cambridge University Press, 2017)
4 Mikael Ras Madsen, "The challenging authority of the European Court of Human Rights: from Cold War legal
diplomacy to the Brighton Declaration and backlash." Law & Contemp. Probs. 79 (2016): 141.
5 Mark Tushnet, "New forms of judicial review and the persistence of rights-and democracy-based worries."
In Bills of Rights, pp. 265-290. (Routledge 2017).