The repeal of the Human Rights Act (HRA), including the reduction of the influence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), will be introduced before parliament in what the government has described as a recast of British sovereignty. However, activists and top lawyers have denounced the historic move, saying the government is systematically eroding people’s rights in an effort to make itself “untouchable” by the courts. The new British rights bill will not have the same protection, they fear. Sacha Deshmukh, CEO of Amnesty International in the United Kingdom, said: [Strasbourg] The court’s intervention in Rwanda last week was an example of a fundamental role in ensuring that basic human rights are not violated, saying nothing more than that the UK should stop deportations to Rwanda pending the outcome. of our own internal court proceedings. “It is very worrying that the United Kingdom Government is prepared to undermine the European Court of Human Rights because of a single decision that it does not like. “It is not about the suffering of rights, but about their abolition. “From the Hillsborough disaster, to the right to a proper investigation into Covid, to the right to question how police investigate endemic violence against women, the Human Rights Act is the cornerstone of popular power in it. the country. “It is no coincidence that the politicians themselves who are accountable want to see it fatally weakened.” A senior government source acknowledged that Rwanda’s decision last week, which humiliated ministers, was a factor. “Some of the problems or challenges we have had (in relation to Rwanda) have strengthened and strengthened the case for what we are doing,” the source said. The government said the bill would make it clear that interim measures by the ECHR, such as the one issued last week, which barred the evacuation flight to Rwanda, were not binding on UK courts. The source said that “sovereignty has been fragmented and challenged for many years by a combination of the EU and other supranational bodies, including the Strasbourg court”. However, UK courts are not required to follow ECHR rulings, and critics say other changes will have a more substantial, negative impact. Stephanie Boyce, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, said: “The erosion of accountability trumpeted by the Minister of Justice signals the deepening of the government’s indifference to the controls and balances that underpin the rule of law. “The bill will create an acceptable category of human rights violations in the UK – introducing [under a new permission stage] blocking claims that are not considered to cause a “significant disadvantage”. “It’s a setback for British justice. Authorities may begin to regard certain rights violations as acceptable because they could no longer be challenged under the law of rights despite the fact that they are contrary to the law. “Overall, the bill would give the state greater unlimited power over the people, a power that would belong to all future governments, regardless of their ideologies.” Jun Pang, Liberty’s political and campaign manager, said: “At times the government tries to change the rules to keep it intact, and Rwanda’s plan is a really good example of that. “This is the latest example, but there are countless examples of government suppression of human rights, whether on the streets, in the courts, at the polls or in parliament. “The rights case will have the effect of eroding everyone’s rights and reducing everyone’s protection, but obviously with the most disproportionate impact on already marginalized communities.” The government said the bill would ensure that courts would take into account a plaintiff’s relevant conduct, such as a detainee’s violent or criminal conduct, in awarding damages, and facilitate the deportation of foreign criminals by allowing future immigration laws to relocate them. prove to be a child or dependent would cause overwhelming, inevitable harm if they leave the country. He also said he would strengthen press freedom by highlighting the right to freedom of expression versus the right to privacy, which has curtailed reporting in recent years, and introducing a stronger test that courts must consider before ordering journalists to uncover their sources. The UK will continue to sign the European Convention on Human Rights, which the HRA has transposed into national law, but the government said the act led the courts to “eliminate, reinterpret or reduce the effects of the primary legislation “. Justice Minister Dominique Raab said: “The rights bill will strengthen the delivery of our freedom to the United Kingdom, while introducing a healthy dose of common sense into the system. “These reforms will strengthen freedom of speech, allow us to deport more foreign offenders and better protect the public from dangerous criminals.” Professor Philippe Sands QC, who participated in the 2013 committee on a rights bill, said: “Mr Raab embraces a nationalist and xenophobic version of the idea of ​​human rights, exploring one of its most fundamental principles: human rights exist for all. and must be enforceable in the case of all. The government wants to turn the clock back to an era before 1945, a time when, as author Joseph Roth put it, “the tombs of world history are yawning; and all the corpses that one thought were buried are coming out.”