0:00:02 > 0:00:05Human rights - we're told they're out of control,
0:00:05 > 0:00:08that Britain's in the grip of a cabal of lawyers
0:00:08 > 0:00:13and judges doing Europe's dirty work, taking away the rights
0:00:13 > 0:00:17of victims to protect the rights of people who don't deserve them.
0:00:17 > 0:00:20Foreign criminals are allowed to stay in the country
0:00:20 > 0:00:22because of a cat!
0:00:22 > 0:00:26Police won't put up "Wanted" posters in case the mug shot
0:00:26 > 0:00:28violates the suspect's rights!
0:00:30 > 0:00:33The whole issue of human rights is sometimes
0:00:33 > 0:00:35distorted by misinformation
0:00:35 > 0:00:40and tabloid outrage but it concerns matters we all care about.
0:00:40 > 0:00:42Like the case of Abu Qatada,
0:00:42 > 0:00:45the radical Islamic preacher who supports terrorism
0:00:45 > 0:00:47but whom human rights laws say
0:00:47 > 0:00:50can't be send back to his own country for trail.
0:00:50 > 0:00:55It gives rights to one individual, even when that one individual
0:00:55 > 0:00:58could be a threat to the rest of the British population.
0:00:58 > 0:01:03Parliament being ordered by judges to do things it thinks wrong.
0:01:03 > 0:01:05What the Supreme Court haven't done
0:01:05 > 0:01:09is they haven't considered the victims and our experience.
0:01:09 > 0:01:12The question has to be asked, "Who is running the country?"
0:01:12 > 0:01:16It even forces us to do things most of us are dead against,
0:01:16 > 0:01:19like giving prisoners the right to vote.
0:01:19 > 0:01:22The reality is that the highest court in Europe has ruled
0:01:22 > 0:01:26that murderers, rapists, people convicted of manslaughter
0:01:26 > 0:01:29are entitled to their human rights. Parliament have already
0:01:29 > 0:01:32been found guilty. They're the prisoners now, the hostages.
0:01:34 > 0:01:37In this film, I'll try to cut through the hype and confusion
0:01:37 > 0:01:40to discover how our commitment to human rights,
0:01:40 > 0:01:41in this oldest of democracies,
0:01:41 > 0:01:45has gone from a universal belief that arose out of the ashes
0:01:45 > 0:01:50of the Second World War to a political poison that now threatens
0:01:50 > 0:01:54to undermine popular support for the very concept of human rights,
0:01:54 > 0:01:59and to show how ultimately this question goes to the very core
0:01:59 > 0:02:02of how this country is governed.
0:02:12 > 0:02:16I spend my life covering events as they happen over there.
0:02:17 > 0:02:20I grill politicians every day in the studio
0:02:20 > 0:02:23just across the road from Parliament.
0:02:23 > 0:02:26Good afternoon and welcome to The Daily Politics...
0:02:26 > 0:02:30And I know just how angry our human rights laws are making many of them.
0:02:32 > 0:02:34The law is an ass!
0:02:34 > 0:02:36There would be less shame
0:02:36 > 0:02:39in leaving the European Convention on Human Rights
0:02:39 > 0:02:41than in giving prisoners the vote.
0:02:41 > 0:02:44The criminals that use the Human Rights Act to try and stay,
0:02:44 > 0:02:47we are clamping down on each and every one of them.
0:02:47 > 0:02:50The politicians are worked up but are they right to be?
0:02:50 > 0:02:52There's plenty of distortion
0:02:52 > 0:02:56and things are not always as they seem.
0:02:56 > 0:03:01Take the "Wanted" poster. The police insist human rights laws
0:03:01 > 0:03:03had nothing to do with their actions.
0:03:03 > 0:03:05Having a cat won't keep you in the country
0:03:05 > 0:03:09but having a family with a cat might well do.
0:03:11 > 0:03:14I want to find out the truth so I'm going to get out
0:03:14 > 0:03:18of Westminster to find out what's really going on.
0:03:23 > 0:03:27Let's start at the beginning - our modern human rights laws
0:03:27 > 0:03:30and the controversy they've caused stem from a set of rules
0:03:30 > 0:03:34called the European Convention on Human Rights.
0:03:34 > 0:03:38The document itself is pretty innocuous and short.
0:03:38 > 0:03:42It guarantees the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
0:03:42 > 0:03:45Everyone has the right, it says, "to freedom of expression."
0:03:45 > 0:03:48Everyone has the right, "to freedom of peaceful assembly."
0:03:48 > 0:03:51Now, who could object to rights like that? Certainly not me.
0:03:51 > 0:03:54They've been at the core of British democracy
0:03:54 > 0:03:57for a very long time but something is going wrong in practice.
0:03:57 > 0:04:00For many people now, the European Court protects
0:04:00 > 0:04:03the rights of some of the nastiest people in society
0:04:03 > 0:04:07while riding roughshod over families and their victims.
0:04:10 > 0:04:15I'm heading to East Lancashire to meet a dad whose life
0:04:15 > 0:04:18has been shattered by one of the cases which has provoked
0:04:18 > 0:04:23the loudest outrage, even from liberal commentators.
0:04:27 > 0:04:31Blackburn, a former mill town, now facing hard times.
0:04:34 > 0:04:37Paul Houston has lived round here all his life.
0:04:38 > 0:04:42In 2003, his 12-year-old daughter, Amy, left the family home
0:04:42 > 0:04:46with her brother to head to the shops to buy a new CD
0:04:46 > 0:04:47from her favourite boy band.
0:04:49 > 0:04:52So Paul, Amy was coming along this pathway here?
0:04:52 > 0:04:55That's correct and she just had one road to cross
0:04:55 > 0:04:59and she was going to cross to catch the bus over there
0:04:59 > 0:05:02and that's when Mr Ibrahim struck her with a motor vehicle
0:05:02 > 0:05:06and she was under the wheels of the... Erm, she was on the bonnet
0:05:06 > 0:05:10of the car and then she slipped under the...the front wheels
0:05:10 > 0:05:12of the motor car and the weight of the car landed
0:05:12 > 0:05:15on top of her, basically.
0:05:15 > 0:05:18Behind the wheel was failed asylum seeker
0:05:18 > 0:05:22Aso Mohammed Ibrahim from Kurdistan in Northern Iraq,
0:05:22 > 0:05:25a petty criminal with a string of convictions.
0:05:25 > 0:05:29A year before he ran Amy down, he'd lost his final appeal against
0:05:29 > 0:05:33deportation and been told by the UK Border Agency to leave the country.
0:05:33 > 0:05:36He didn't and the Border Agency hadn't got round to removing him
0:05:36 > 0:05:39before he killed Amy.
0:05:39 > 0:05:42When...this terrible thing happened, and Amy then fell off
0:05:42 > 0:05:48the bonnet on to the wheels, what then happened?
0:05:48 > 0:05:52Mr Ibrahim got out of the car, he saw that Amy was trapped
0:05:52 > 0:05:55- and he ran off in that direction. - He just ran away?
0:05:55 > 0:05:58And he just left her trapped under the wheels of the motorcar.
0:05:58 > 0:06:00She was still alive at the time.
0:06:02 > 0:06:05I wasn't quite prepared for... for what I saw
0:06:05 > 0:06:07when I got to the hospital.
0:06:07 > 0:06:10She was laid out on a table with just tubes in her
0:06:10 > 0:06:13and I just... I couldn't take it in.
0:06:13 > 0:06:16I was... I was absolutely horrified.
0:06:17 > 0:06:20And the hospital left you in no doubt that the toughest
0:06:20 > 0:06:24decision of all had to be taken?
0:06:24 > 0:06:28To switch the life support machine off and watch your child stop breathing,
0:06:28 > 0:06:30and there's nothing you can do about it,
0:06:30 > 0:06:33it's just the worst feeling in the world.
0:06:34 > 0:06:38Ibrahim served just a couple of months but you might think
0:06:38 > 0:06:41when he got out, there'd be nothing to stop us slinging him
0:06:41 > 0:06:45out of the country PDQ, like we used to with foreign criminals.
0:06:45 > 0:06:48But you'd be dead wrong. After Amy's death,
0:06:48 > 0:06:51he married an English woman and started a family.
0:06:51 > 0:06:54So a judge ruled that to send him back to Kurdistan, even though
0:06:54 > 0:06:57it's the safest and richest part of Iraq,
0:06:57 > 0:06:59would breech their right to a family life.
0:06:59 > 0:07:02He was able to say, and the judge agreed with him,
0:07:02 > 0:07:06"You have a right to a family life here in Britain,
0:07:06 > 0:07:08"so you don't have to go back."
0:07:08 > 0:07:12- That's right.- But he took away your right to a family life.
0:07:12 > 0:07:14Absolutely. You know, it's about balance
0:07:14 > 0:07:17and this is one of the things I've always argued. It's about
0:07:17 > 0:07:20balance and fairness. Where's my rights of family life, you know?
0:07:20 > 0:07:22You lost your family.
0:07:22 > 0:07:25Absolutely, you know and where's Amy's right to life?
0:07:25 > 0:07:27That's another human right.
0:07:35 > 0:07:37The Ibrahim case provoked outrage
0:07:37 > 0:07:41but he isn't the only foreign criminal who can't be deported.
0:07:41 > 0:07:45Take Pakistani immigrant Raja Mohammed Anwar Khan, convicted
0:07:45 > 0:07:49of causing death by dangerous driving when he ran down an innocent
0:07:49 > 0:07:54father of two, Peter Jolly, while coming down from a heroin high.
0:07:54 > 0:07:57Khan's wife and two sons were living in the UK.
0:07:57 > 0:08:00At the end of his jail time, a judge stopped him
0:08:00 > 0:08:02being deported back to Pakistan.
0:08:02 > 0:08:06"To do so," ruled the judge, "would be a disproportionate
0:08:06 > 0:08:09"breech of his family life under human rights laws."
0:08:11 > 0:08:15Or Rohan Winfield from Barbados, convicted of twice raping
0:08:15 > 0:08:18a young woman but unable to be sent home when he was
0:08:18 > 0:08:22released from prison because he had fathered two children in the UK.
0:08:22 > 0:08:25The human rights rules stepped in to protect - you've got it -
0:08:25 > 0:08:28"his right to a family life."
0:08:37 > 0:08:40Paul has fought hard to honour Amy's memory by trying
0:08:40 > 0:08:43to change our human rights laws.
0:08:43 > 0:08:47You don't have a problem with human rights as such, do you?
0:08:47 > 0:08:49No, I agree with human rights.
0:08:49 > 0:08:51I think human rights is a good thing,
0:08:51 > 0:08:56you only have to look at Egypt and Libya and Syria, they need human rights.
0:08:56 > 0:08:58To see what it's like in a society without human rights.
0:08:58 > 0:09:02Absolutely, you know. Basic human rights is...is...
0:09:02 > 0:09:07it's essential in society, that we have respect for one another
0:09:07 > 0:09:10but it's the interpretation and it's been that stretched now,
0:09:10 > 0:09:15it no longer represents or does the job that it's supposed to do.
0:09:18 > 0:09:22Paul's experience and the views that it's given him
0:09:22 > 0:09:28illustrate a potential problem for human rights in this country.
0:09:28 > 0:09:34If judges continually make rulings that the decent mainstream
0:09:34 > 0:09:41majority of this country regards as unacceptable then the danger is
0:09:41 > 0:09:45that that decent majority is going to become increasingly
0:09:45 > 0:09:49hostile to the very idea of human rights.
0:09:55 > 0:09:57And it's not just bereaved families
0:09:57 > 0:10:00who feel they're on the wrong end of our human rights laws.
0:10:00 > 0:10:04There's serious concern that all our security is being threatened
0:10:04 > 0:10:06by the over-reaching tentacles.
0:10:09 > 0:10:14John Reid was Tony Blair's last Home Secretary and to borrow a phrase
0:10:14 > 0:10:17from his boss, "He's got scars on his back from the way
0:10:17 > 0:10:21"our human rights rules seem stacked in favour of those
0:10:21 > 0:10:22"who threaten terror."
0:10:24 > 0:10:28It gives absolute rights to one individual, even when that
0:10:28 > 0:10:31one individual may be a threat to the rest of the British population.
0:10:31 > 0:10:36We were prohibited from taking into account the potential effect
0:10:36 > 0:10:42of terrorism or murder on the other 64 million people.
0:10:42 > 0:10:45- You mean the rights of everybody else?- That's unbalanced.
0:10:45 > 0:10:49NEWSREADER: A judge's verdict leaves anti-terror laws in disarray.
0:10:49 > 0:10:54A High Court ruling says terror suspects have human rights too.
0:10:54 > 0:10:56As Home Secretary in 2006,
0:10:56 > 0:11:00John Reid's flagship policy of control orders were struck out.
0:11:00 > 0:11:03The judges ruled that virtual house arrest for terror suspects
0:11:03 > 0:11:07amounted to indefinite detention without trial.
0:11:07 > 0:11:13And the irony of all of this is the very first right
0:11:13 > 0:11:17enshrined in European Convention of Human Rights is the right to life
0:11:17 > 0:11:20and yet when you are considering the threat to all
0:11:20 > 0:11:23of the British citizens and their lives,
0:11:23 > 0:11:26from one person, you can not weigh that in the balance.
0:11:27 > 0:11:32So you end up in the position where you can't deport someone
0:11:32 > 0:11:36because of one of the articles of the European Convention
0:11:36 > 0:11:41of Human Rights and you cannot detain them either
0:11:41 > 0:11:43because that contravenes another one.
0:11:43 > 0:11:47So, somehow, we have to stop people playing that system.
0:11:47 > 0:11:51Nobody's been better at playing the system than Abu Qatada.
0:11:51 > 0:11:55Despite an immigration tribunal stating, "He was heavily involved,
0:11:55 > 0:12:00"indeed, at the centre, of terrorist activities associated with Al-Qaeda,"
0:12:00 > 0:12:04the European Court of Human Rights says he can't be deported
0:12:04 > 0:12:06because some of the evidence against him
0:12:06 > 0:12:08might have been obtained by torture.
0:12:11 > 0:12:15So you're saying that because of cases like Abu Qatada
0:12:15 > 0:12:20and other cases where bad people seem to be protected
0:12:20 > 0:12:25and victims are often left dangling in the wind, that brings
0:12:25 > 0:12:30the whole human rights concept into disrepute in the public's eyes?
0:12:31 > 0:12:36I'm saying that God forbid it should happen but if there was some
0:12:36 > 0:12:41major atrocity, which people could point to as having at least
0:12:41 > 0:12:46part of its causation in the Government's inability to remove
0:12:46 > 0:12:50certain people, to detain them, to deport them, to keep them in
0:12:50 > 0:12:54protective custody, then the backlash in this country would be huge and
0:12:54 > 0:12:59it wouldn't be an impulse to improve upon the European Convention of
0:12:59 > 0:13:05Human Rights, it would be a public demand that we derogate from it
0:13:05 > 0:13:09completely, we leave it completely, and I don't want to see that happen.
0:13:10 > 0:13:13John Reid served at the heart of a government,
0:13:13 > 0:13:17which introduced our current human rights laws but if even he regrets
0:13:17 > 0:13:21how that's turned out in practice, something really must be amiss.
0:13:21 > 0:13:24So how did we get here? Only one way to find out.
0:13:26 > 0:13:28Where would we be without Europe?
0:13:28 > 0:13:32German cars, Italian fashion, Belgian chocolate,
0:13:32 > 0:13:37Spanish sun... Oh, yes of course! French Champagne.
0:13:40 > 0:13:44I love Europe. It's why I try to spend as much time there as I can
0:13:44 > 0:13:49but has it also lumbered us with a zealous obsession with human rights,
0:13:49 > 0:13:55which flies in the face of a British sense of justice and fair play?
0:14:03 > 0:14:07Wish me bon voyage, as I head to the heart of darkness.
0:14:07 > 0:14:10I'm taking the train to Strasbourg,
0:14:10 > 0:14:15the French town on the German border where the Human Rights Convention
0:14:15 > 0:14:19was drawn up and where today the court, which enforces it, presides.
0:14:19 > 0:14:24And where Brits anxious to enforce their human rights have the final right to appeal.
0:14:27 > 0:14:31Delve deep into the history of the European Convention
0:14:31 > 0:14:33and prepare to be shocked.
0:14:33 > 0:14:37For far from it being some foreign continental conspiracy,
0:14:37 > 0:14:40the concept of a Europe-wide charter of rights
0:14:40 > 0:14:43was very much a British idea.
0:14:43 > 0:14:47More than that, the guiding force behind it wasn't some French federalist
0:14:47 > 0:14:52or Luxembourg lefty or even a British bureaucrat.
0:14:52 > 0:14:57It was none other that the greatest of great Britons.
0:14:57 > 0:14:59That's right, cue Sir Winston Churchill.
0:15:07 > 0:15:12We hope that this congress and the efforts,
0:15:12 > 0:15:16which will be made by all, will do some good.
0:15:18 > 0:15:22In 1948, the man who saved Europe gathered grandees
0:15:22 > 0:15:27from across the continent in Holland to outline his grand vision.
0:15:30 > 0:15:36Europe can only be united by the heartfelt wish and vehement
0:15:36 > 0:15:40expression of the great majority
0:15:40 > 0:15:45of all the people in all the parties in all the freedom-loving countries
0:15:45 > 0:15:48no matter where they dwell or how they vote.
0:15:48 > 0:15:52Now can you believe it? The newsreels cameras cut out before he started
0:15:52 > 0:15:56talking about human rights but this is what he said.
0:15:56 > 0:15:59"In the centre of our movement
0:15:59 > 0:16:01"stands the idea of a Charter of Human Rights.
0:16:01 > 0:16:03"We aim at the eventual participation
0:16:03 > 0:16:05"of all European peoples.
0:16:05 > 0:16:09"We welcome any country where the people own the government
0:16:09 > 0:16:11"and not the government the people."
0:16:12 > 0:16:16In the immediate aftermath of the defeat of Nazi tyranny,
0:16:16 > 0:16:19who could blame him for such high-blown sentiment
0:16:19 > 0:16:22or the audience for its fulsome applause.
0:16:25 > 0:16:30And Winston's weren't the only Tory fingerprints on a document
0:16:30 > 0:16:33today's Tories regard with such suspicion.
0:16:33 > 0:16:34Churchill may have had the vision
0:16:34 > 0:16:38but he left the detail to another Conservative.
0:16:40 > 0:16:451949, the year I was born, and in this magnificent chamber,
0:16:45 > 0:16:48the first gathering of the Council of Europe to draft
0:16:48 > 0:16:54new human rights rules for a divided and war-torn continent and leading
0:16:54 > 0:17:00it all, a hanging and flogging Tory grandee called David Maxwell Fyfe.
0:17:01 > 0:17:05His name may be forgotten now but if I tell you that just two years later
0:17:05 > 0:17:07when Churchill returned to power,
0:17:07 > 0:17:13he became arguably the hardest line Home Secretary of recent history,
0:17:13 > 0:17:16you'll see that this was hardly some "red under the bed"
0:17:16 > 0:17:18intent on destroying British tradition.
0:17:18 > 0:17:21INTERRUPTS: Just wait a moment.
0:17:23 > 0:17:25Are you telling this tribunal
0:17:25 > 0:17:28that you knew nothing about the effect in Austria?
0:17:28 > 0:17:31Instead, inspired by what he heard as a prosecutor at the
0:17:31 > 0:17:35Nuremburg War Trials, he was in charge of drawing up the document,
0:17:35 > 0:17:41putting into action Churchill's vision. Even now, this crusty Tory
0:17:41 > 0:17:44is revered around here as "the father of the Convention."
0:17:46 > 0:17:49So the Convention was now from its inception
0:17:49 > 0:17:52a radical or alien manifesto.
0:17:52 > 0:17:54It merely enshrined a number of basic human rights
0:17:54 > 0:17:57that most Brits took for granted,
0:17:57 > 0:18:01to guard against a return to the horrors of Nazi tyranny.
0:18:01 > 0:18:05Hitler had spoken in this very hall and to contrast with
0:18:05 > 0:18:11the barbarity then unfolding from the other side of the Iron Curtain.
0:18:12 > 0:18:16So this was really sort of "No more Nazis"?
0:18:16 > 0:18:18Never the Nazis again?
0:18:18 > 0:18:22Exactly right. It was "No more Nazis" but also it was concern about the Soviet Union.
0:18:22 > 0:18:28The Council here was saying, "What you do behind your own borders is no longer
0:18:28 > 0:18:32"just a matter for you, cos that way led to the concentration camps."
0:18:32 > 0:18:35Yes, exactly. Yes, effectively, they were saying,
0:18:35 > 0:18:37"No, you can't just decide this is your sovereign state.
0:18:37 > 0:18:40"You can do what you want to your own people,"
0:18:40 > 0:18:44because that's what happened in Nazi Germany and obviously led to atrocities.
0:18:44 > 0:18:47Instead they were saying, "No, we are going to allow your own citizens
0:18:47 > 0:18:49"to complain about you,
0:18:49 > 0:18:52"to take a case to the European Court of European Rights."
0:18:52 > 0:18:53Once the court was set up in 1959.
0:18:53 > 0:18:58And the court is able to find a violation against your own state.
0:18:58 > 0:19:00That was the major breakthrough that occurred.
0:19:00 > 0:19:04So they set up these rights, as you say, basic rights, that
0:19:04 > 0:19:08- the British had taken for granted... - Yeah.- Still do.- Yeah.
0:19:08 > 0:19:09What then happened?
0:19:09 > 0:19:14Because we had states with, on the whole, quite strong democratic
0:19:14 > 0:19:16traditions and respect for human rights,
0:19:16 > 0:19:21then we didn't see large scale violations of human rights
0:19:21 > 0:19:24of the type that the convention was set up to deal with.
0:19:24 > 0:19:28Instead we saw certain minorities such as prisoners,
0:19:28 > 0:19:31sexual minorities, gaining protection.
0:19:31 > 0:19:35So in a way, fairly peripheral in terms of the kind of violations
0:19:35 > 0:19:38- that they had in mind.- What the founding fathers had in mind. - Exactly, yeah.
0:19:38 > 0:19:41Not dramatic large-scale violations of rights
0:19:41 > 0:19:44but on the other hand, the Convention was used in important ways
0:19:44 > 0:19:48to improve the lot of certain of certain minorities.
0:19:50 > 0:19:53Post-war prosperity meant the Convention wasn't needed
0:19:53 > 0:19:57to stop dictatorship returning to Western Europe but as Helen says,
0:19:57 > 0:20:00in its early days, the court did pass judgment
0:20:00 > 0:20:02on important cases from Britain.
0:20:02 > 0:20:06It ruled against corporal punishment in schools
0:20:06 > 0:20:10and restricted the state's power to intercept phone calls.
0:20:10 > 0:20:13But they weren't all what could be seen as left-wing rulings.
0:20:15 > 0:20:19In the early 1980s, the court ruled against the trade union closed shop.
0:20:19 > 0:20:22That put a smile on the Thatcher Government.
0:20:23 > 0:20:27And the court advanced what were then seen as controversial rights,
0:20:27 > 0:20:31which today we take for granted, most famously perhaps
0:20:31 > 0:20:33when Strasbourg ruled that gay men
0:20:33 > 0:20:36and women should be allowed to serve in the British Armed Forces.
0:20:36 > 0:20:39Today, the forces take part in Gay Pride parades
0:20:39 > 0:20:45but even in the '90s, the case lost in every British court.
0:20:45 > 0:20:49Gay service personnel fighting their sackings had to spend years
0:20:49 > 0:20:52bringing their cases all the way to Strasbourg.
0:20:59 > 0:21:02I know all about the long road to Strasbourg. In the '80s,
0:21:02 > 0:21:04as editor of The Sunday Times,
0:21:04 > 0:21:08I serialised a book called Spy Catcher.
0:21:08 > 0:21:09Great, soon as you can...
0:21:09 > 0:21:13It blew the lid off the workings of the British Security Services.
0:21:15 > 0:21:18There it is, Spy Catcher in Britain.
0:21:18 > 0:21:20I think that in the issue of Spy Catcher,
0:21:20 > 0:21:23the press in Britain is now less free than it's been
0:21:23 > 0:21:27at any time in peacetime Britain in this century.
0:21:27 > 0:21:29The Thatcher Government tried to ban it.
0:21:29 > 0:21:32It even tried to put me in jail.
0:21:32 > 0:21:37After a series of interminable court cases in which British judges
0:21:37 > 0:21:41proved rather less than enthusiastic about "freedom of the press,"
0:21:41 > 0:21:47we brought the case to Strasbourg and won 24-0.
0:21:47 > 0:21:50But it had taken years and cost millions.
0:21:50 > 0:21:53It's clear the Strasbourg Court has played a crucial role
0:21:53 > 0:21:55in enhancing human rights in Britain.
0:21:55 > 0:21:58So why all the rows about it today?
0:21:58 > 0:22:01Well, as the court has grown in confidence,
0:22:01 > 0:22:07it's also grown in reach, in ways the founding fathers never imagined.
0:22:07 > 0:22:09Most of us get confused about these European institutions,
0:22:09 > 0:22:12which sound the same but do different things
0:22:12 > 0:22:14in different buildings.
0:22:16 > 0:22:19Let's bust our first myth - the European Convention
0:22:19 > 0:22:23has nothing to do with the Common Market, the European Community,
0:22:23 > 0:22:27the European Union or even this European Parliament.
0:22:27 > 0:22:31Instead, the Convention is part of a completely different club called
0:22:31 > 0:22:35the Council of Europe. It's bigger, even more unwieldy than the EU
0:22:35 > 0:22:38and less fussy about who it lets through the front door.
0:22:43 > 0:22:48The court certainly needs a substantial building.
0:22:48 > 0:22:52There are now 47 countries signed up to the European Convention.
0:22:52 > 0:22:58Each one is allowed to send a judge to this court here in Strasbourg.
0:22:58 > 0:23:02The current president is a Brit but it means that some cases
0:23:02 > 0:23:05involving British human rights can involve judges who come
0:23:05 > 0:23:09from countries who's own human rights record
0:23:09 > 0:23:11is pretty questionable.
0:23:11 > 0:23:14Moldova, Azerbaijan, Turkey, Russia.
0:23:14 > 0:23:18Do all 47 member countries take as much notice of the Convention
0:23:18 > 0:23:21and the court's rulings as the Brits?
0:23:21 > 0:23:25Of course not. Some members regularly breech the most basic provisions of the Convention
0:23:25 > 0:23:27and take scant notice of the court
0:23:27 > 0:23:31when it rules against them time and time again.
0:23:35 > 0:23:38Strasbourg has to wrap itself up against the icy blasts
0:23:38 > 0:23:40that swoop down from Siberia
0:23:40 > 0:23:44but that's not the only unwelcome guest it receives from Russia.
0:23:44 > 0:23:50Over a quarter of the court's backlog of 150,000 cases
0:23:50 > 0:23:52emanate from the Great Bear.
0:23:52 > 0:23:57That's something this feisty, brave lawyer knows only too well.
0:23:57 > 0:24:02Karina Moskalenko is the leading Russian advocate in Strasbourg.
0:24:02 > 0:24:05Her caseload swells almost daily.
0:24:06 > 0:24:11It's torture, it's killings, disappearances...
0:24:13 > 0:24:20..unfair trials, illegal arrests, unlawful detention, violation
0:24:20 > 0:24:25- of right to free expression. - And it's to defend these kinds
0:24:25 > 0:24:28of rights under threat in Russia
0:24:28 > 0:24:33- that the European convention was created?- Yeah, exactly.
0:24:33 > 0:24:38When Russia loses in front of the Strasbourg Court,
0:24:38 > 0:24:41do they stop the abuse of human rights?
0:24:42 > 0:24:47- Not yet. Not...- So they don't?
0:24:47 > 0:24:49They do not but some of the abuses,
0:24:49 > 0:24:54they keep in mind that it is not permissible to do that.
0:24:54 > 0:24:57Is it dangerous standing up for human rights in Russia?
0:24:59 > 0:25:03Of course, you know, some of my friends already not alive.
0:25:03 > 0:25:07Russia may be the biggest breaker of Convention rules but it's far
0:25:07 > 0:25:13from the only signed-up country that doesn't live up to its ideals.
0:25:13 > 0:25:17Take Azerbaijan, accused by human rights groups of harassing
0:25:17 > 0:25:21human rights activists and arresting political opponents and as you
0:25:21 > 0:25:26can see here, they're not too keen on the rights of protesters either.
0:25:26 > 0:25:29Remember Azerbaijan is a signatory to the Convention.
0:25:32 > 0:25:36Even the record of Western European democracies is patchy.
0:25:36 > 0:25:40France lost three times as many cases here as Britain last year
0:25:40 > 0:25:43and the Italians are notorious for turning a blind eye
0:25:43 > 0:25:47to Strasbourg's decisions when they're inconvenient.
0:25:47 > 0:25:52So why do we in Britain take the pronouncements so seriously?
0:25:52 > 0:25:55So seriously, in fact, we gold plate the Convention.
0:26:02 > 0:26:06We passed an act that ensures all our laws have to adhere
0:26:06 > 0:26:07to its provisions.
0:26:08 > 0:26:12Back at the very dawn of New Labour, Tony Blair, a lawyer by training,
0:26:12 > 0:26:16gave the legal establishment something it had always wanted.
0:26:16 > 0:26:19He took the European Convention
0:26:19 > 0:26:22and wrote it into British law as the Human Rights Act.
0:26:22 > 0:26:27Now this placed human rights at the very centre of British public life.
0:26:27 > 0:26:29It made it illegal for schools, hospitals,
0:26:29 > 0:26:33the police to act in defiance of human rights.
0:26:33 > 0:26:37It meant public servants had to second guess their actions
0:26:37 > 0:26:41in case they ended up in court and for those who still thought
0:26:41 > 0:26:45their human rights were being abused but didn't like the judgment
0:26:45 > 0:26:50of British Courts, they could still chance their luck in Strasbourg.
0:26:59 > 0:27:02Harehills in Leeds feels a long way from Westminster
0:27:02 > 0:27:07but it's on these streets that they feel the fallout of our British
0:27:07 > 0:27:11obsession with taking the human rights rule so literally.
0:27:16 > 0:27:20Jasvinder Sanghera is the driving force behind the charity Karma Nirvana.
0:27:20 > 0:27:23Based here in Leeds, it wins praise for its work
0:27:23 > 0:27:26with victims of forced marriages.
0:27:26 > 0:27:28You stared campaigning against forced marriages
0:27:28 > 0:27:31because you were almost forced into one yourself?
0:27:31 > 0:27:33Absolutely and I was 14.
0:27:33 > 0:27:36I came home from school one day, my mother presented me with a photograph
0:27:36 > 0:27:39and I was to learn I was promised to this man when I was eight.
0:27:39 > 0:27:42This was a photograph of your supposed future husband?
0:27:42 > 0:27:46Absolutely and I was thinking about my homework and school.
0:27:46 > 0:27:50I said "no" and as a result of protesting my parents took me
0:27:50 > 0:27:52out of school when I was 15.
0:27:52 > 0:27:54I was held a prisoner in my own home for a number of weeks,
0:27:54 > 0:27:59missing from education, not being noticed and I agreed in order
0:27:59 > 0:28:02to buy back my freedom but then I ran away from home.
0:28:02 > 0:28:05I saw an opportunity when I was almost 16,
0:28:05 > 0:28:08and my family were very clear. "You either come back home
0:28:08 > 0:28:12"and marry this stranger or you are now dead in our eyes."
0:28:14 > 0:28:17There are some horrendous stories associated with forced marriages.
0:28:17 > 0:28:20And you've got personal experience of that.
0:28:20 > 0:28:23- All your sisters went into forced marriages.- Yes.
0:28:23 > 0:28:25One of them had a terrible ending.
0:28:25 > 0:28:27My sister was 24-years-old
0:28:27 > 0:28:30- when she set herself on fire. - She set herself on fire?
0:28:30 > 0:28:33She did and she suffered over 80% burns.
0:28:33 > 0:28:38You only set yourself on fire if you're enduring a living hell.
0:28:38 > 0:28:39Mmm, absolutely.
0:28:39 > 0:28:44Motivated by her tragic experience, Jasvinder has been helping those in the same plight.
0:28:44 > 0:28:48She also campaigned to raise the age to 21 before anybody
0:28:48 > 0:28:51could come into Britain from outside Europe to get married.
0:28:51 > 0:28:55She won! Parliament made 21 the law.
0:28:56 > 0:29:01- So you had all the parties behind you?- Yes.- Parliament spoke?
0:29:01 > 0:29:03- Absolutely.- The people spoke?
0:29:03 > 0:29:04- Absolutely.- And you got the change
0:29:04 > 0:29:09- and did that change make a difference in your view? - Yes, in my view, it did.
0:29:09 > 0:29:13What we evidenced quite clearly on the helpline
0:29:13 > 0:29:17and from face to face interaction with victims, them telling us
0:29:17 > 0:29:21that this rule has actually saved us from being forced into a marriage,
0:29:21 > 0:29:25it's given us more time, it's allowed us to enter into education.
0:29:25 > 0:29:29It's allowed a ground for compromise even for some family members.
0:29:29 > 0:29:34But Jasvinder's law was challenged under the Human Rights Act
0:29:34 > 0:29:38by Brits determined to marry someone under 21 from abroad.
0:29:38 > 0:29:41Their right to a family life won.
0:29:41 > 0:29:44Her law was struck down by the UK's Supreme Court.
0:29:44 > 0:29:46So you had this new law in place?
0:29:46 > 0:29:48- Yes.- You think it was working?
0:29:48 > 0:29:50- Absolutely.- And then the Supreme Court came along
0:29:50 > 0:29:56and said no, this is contrary to the Human Rights Act?
0:29:56 > 0:29:59Me personally and certainly the team
0:29:59 > 0:30:03and for all the victims out there, it is a severe blow.
0:30:03 > 0:30:07A blow because what the Supreme Court haven't done is
0:30:07 > 0:30:11they haven't considered the victims and our experiences
0:30:11 > 0:30:14and our right to have human rights and not to be abducted,
0:30:14 > 0:30:17kidnapped, raped, abused, which is what forced marriage is.
0:30:17 > 0:30:19Did it every cross your mind
0:30:19 > 0:30:23when you were campaigning for this that a forced marriage
0:30:23 > 0:30:28is one of the worst transgressions, one of the worst abuses of human rights.
0:30:28 > 0:30:34And yet you've been scuppered by the Human Rights Act?
0:30:34 > 0:30:35It beggars belief.
0:30:35 > 0:30:40The question has to be asked, "Who is running the country, here?"
0:30:40 > 0:30:43This as far as I'm concerned was a Government decision that
0:30:43 > 0:30:48should have been upheld and sadly the judges have let us down.
0:30:48 > 0:30:52And as a result of that, they have given power to the perpetrators.
0:30:54 > 0:30:58Talking to Jasvinder, it's pretty clear that
0:30:58 > 0:31:01when it comes to the abuse of human rights,
0:31:01 > 0:31:05forced marriages is up there with the worst of them.
0:31:05 > 0:31:08So you would think that our human rights legislation, our courts,
0:31:08 > 0:31:14the Strasbourg Convention, they'd all pile in on the side of the victim.
0:31:14 > 0:31:17But it hasn't worked out like that. Our UK Supreme Court has
0:31:17 > 0:31:20ruled against one measure that many thought would be
0:31:20 > 0:31:24effective in stamping out forced marriages.
0:31:24 > 0:31:28It did so even though Parliament had voted for it by a massive majority.
0:31:29 > 0:31:33Jasvinder's case isn't the only one where our courts have
0:31:33 > 0:31:36overruled our legislators in Parliament.
0:31:36 > 0:31:39Take the controversial issue of the Sex Offenders' Register.
0:31:39 > 0:31:42Just last year, two convicted sex offenders turned
0:31:42 > 0:31:46to our human rights laws, there aim to get sex offenders
0:31:46 > 0:31:49the right to appeal against lifelong inclusion on the register.
0:31:49 > 0:31:52They won. The Government had to climb down,
0:31:52 > 0:31:57despite the Home Secretary saying she "was appalled at the decision".
0:32:01 > 0:32:05Behind the decisions that so annoy politicians
0:32:05 > 0:32:09and the public a whole new human rights industry has shot up.
0:32:09 > 0:32:13The Human Rights Act has certainly been lucrative for the legal profession.
0:32:13 > 0:32:16It may even have helped to pay for a Ferrari or two round here.
0:32:16 > 0:32:20You can see why the legal establishment was so keen
0:32:20 > 0:32:25to bring it in but do they now accept it's creating huge problems in practice?
0:32:25 > 0:32:29This is a question of balance and proportionality
0:32:29 > 0:32:33- and I do...- Human Rights lawyers don't come any more radical,
0:32:33 > 0:32:37successful or outspoken than Michael Mansfield.
0:32:37 > 0:32:41A lot of people just thought this whole human rights business
0:32:41 > 0:32:44had become an industry which had made lawyers rich.
0:32:44 > 0:32:47- Absolutely not.- But lawyers have made quite a few bob out of it?
0:32:47 > 0:32:48No, I'm sorry, they have not
0:32:48 > 0:32:51and I you know I certainly would like to see the evidence for that.
0:32:51 > 0:32:53Absolutely not.
0:32:53 > 0:32:56- This is not a money-making machine and in fact.- But whole chambers
0:32:56 > 0:32:58- have sprung up who's raison... - Well, of course,
0:32:58 > 0:33:01- are chambers that specialise in all kinds of things.- In human rights?
0:33:01 > 0:33:03- Of course.- Which didn't exist 20 years ago right?
0:33:03 > 0:33:07No, of course not because it there wasn't a human rights agenda then.
0:33:07 > 0:33:10But the people there are not exactly on the breadline, are they?
0:33:10 > 0:33:14Well, I... So you're not on the breadline
0:33:14 > 0:33:16and lots of people are not on the breadline
0:33:16 > 0:33:18but that doesn't mean to say that they're earning vast sums of money.
0:33:18 > 0:33:20These are sort of allegations that are thrown about,
0:33:20 > 0:33:25- I don't know where they come from. - I'm putting them to you for you to give me your reply.- My reply is
0:33:25 > 0:33:28I don't know where it comes from and I don't agree with it.
0:33:28 > 0:33:32Parking the clearly sensitive issue of money,
0:33:32 > 0:33:34surely Michael Mansfield gets the anger out
0:33:34 > 0:33:37there about how the human rights laws are being interpreted.
0:33:37 > 0:33:40You're a great champion of the human rights
0:33:40 > 0:33:44and of human rights legislation that
0:33:44 > 0:33:47because of some rulings like that, which don't strike the public mood
0:33:47 > 0:33:51as right, that you bring the whole thing into discredit?
0:33:51 > 0:33:54Well, the assumption here is that they don't strike the public mood.
0:33:54 > 0:33:58Now who is assessing the public mood in these cases?
0:33:58 > 0:34:00In other words, you say that
0:34:00 > 0:34:04but I get a lot of feedback from people who are very supportive
0:34:04 > 0:34:09of the Human Rights Act because, for example, journalists' sources
0:34:09 > 0:34:13have been protected, disclosure of information for people who want to
0:34:13 > 0:34:16bring actions against the Government making the Government accountable.
0:34:16 > 0:34:20They're all saying, in these cases, it's great,
0:34:20 > 0:34:23it's provided accountability where it didn't exist before.
0:34:23 > 0:34:29So again I'm not over-convinced that the public mood is, it's not working.
0:34:29 > 0:34:32No and I'm sure there are judgments that the court makes,
0:34:32 > 0:34:35which are popular with public opinion
0:34:35 > 0:34:38and they don't get the coverage, I understand that point.
0:34:38 > 0:34:41But are you telling me that if we had an opinion poll on
0:34:41 > 0:34:45whether Abu Qatada, for example, should be allowed to stay
0:34:45 > 0:34:48in this country, that there wouldn't be a huge majority of us
0:34:48 > 0:34:54- sending him to Jordan?- First of all, I don't think I want the legal system
0:34:54 > 0:34:58- governed by opinion polls, first of all.- But you mention popularity.
0:34:58 > 0:34:59No, you did.
0:34:59 > 0:35:01You're, concerned about popularity,
0:35:01 > 0:35:05I'm not concerned about... I'm concerned about the public conscience,
0:35:05 > 0:35:07which isn't quite the same.
0:35:07 > 0:35:13Take Qatada, very interesting how the tabloids mainly have responded to that.
0:35:13 > 0:35:18- On the day that Qatada was decided there was another case. - About life imprisonment?
0:35:18 > 0:35:22Yes. Did that get the same coverage? Not at all
0:35:22 > 0:35:25but the people who get upset about the Human Rights Act would have said
0:35:25 > 0:35:30if they knew, they would probably have said, "Yes, Strasbourg is right.
0:35:30 > 0:35:35"When life is given as a life sentence." The Strasbourg Court
0:35:35 > 0:35:39was saying that the British Courts were quite entitled to have
0:35:39 > 0:35:45that as a provision, that the public would probably support it.
0:35:45 > 0:35:48I don't know but that gets very little publicity.
0:35:48 > 0:35:50Qatada gets a lot of publicity.
0:35:53 > 0:35:56Mike Mansfield has a point. It isn't just terror suspects
0:35:56 > 0:35:59and sex offenders who can use our human rights Laws.
0:35:59 > 0:36:02There are plenty of cases involving people who elicit
0:36:02 > 0:36:03real public sympathy.
0:36:03 > 0:36:06- I feel like I've won the lottery. - Take breast cancer patients
0:36:06 > 0:36:10battling to get the life-prolonging drug Herceptin.
0:36:10 > 0:36:13When the NHS wouldn't stump up, they used the Human Rights Act to
0:36:13 > 0:36:15force the authorities to provide it.
0:36:17 > 0:36:21Or the elderly married couple never apart for 65 years
0:36:21 > 0:36:25until the council put them in different care homes.
0:36:25 > 0:36:28Until the Human Rights Act stepped in and reunited them.
0:36:30 > 0:36:34But even if you feel these cases are just, it's still judges
0:36:34 > 0:36:38overruling our elected politicians in vital policy areas
0:36:38 > 0:36:41and the supremacy of Parliament being overridden.
0:36:44 > 0:36:47Hull.
0:36:47 > 0:36:53Known as the home of John Prescott, The Housemartins and white phone boxes.
0:36:56 > 0:37:00But it's also famous or infamous as the home of a man whose
0:37:00 > 0:37:04use of human rights laws makes many uncomfortable.
0:37:04 > 0:37:08£1.45 for a big pie like that, beautiful.
0:37:08 > 0:37:13He's taken the Government to Europe to win the right for prisoners to vote.
0:37:13 > 0:37:16When you lost in the British High Court
0:37:16 > 0:37:21and then in the Appeal Court, did you think then of giving up?
0:37:21 > 0:37:26I didn't expect the British establishment to give me justice.
0:37:26 > 0:37:30I don't believe the British justice system is the best
0:37:30 > 0:37:33in the world. My view is British justice is the worst in the world.
0:37:33 > 0:37:35So you're a fan of the Strasbourg Court
0:37:35 > 0:37:38and of the European Convention?
0:37:38 > 0:37:42I'm probably one of their number one fans. I'm actually a human rights defender,
0:37:42 > 0:37:45which is something that the Council of Europe has set up.
0:37:45 > 0:37:49Mr Hirst hasn't always had such regard for human rights.
0:37:49 > 0:37:54In 1979, he killed his landlady, Bronia Burton,
0:37:54 > 0:37:57hitting her seven times with an axe.
0:37:57 > 0:38:01Convicted of manslaughter, he spent 25 years in prison.
0:38:01 > 0:38:03He studied law behind bars
0:38:03 > 0:38:07and campaigned relentlessly for prisoners' votes when released.
0:38:07 > 0:38:12In 2005 he was successful. Strasbourg Court ruled that
0:38:12 > 0:38:15"the right to participate in elections had been violated,"
0:38:15 > 0:38:19a ruling that outraged our politicians.
0:38:19 > 0:38:21The then Labour Government and the current coalition
0:38:21 > 0:38:26so far refuse to enforce the ruling and put ballot boxes in jails.
0:38:29 > 0:38:31Do you understand what people feel if you look at this situation
0:38:31 > 0:38:35in this country, the Conservative Party's against prisoners' votes,
0:38:35 > 0:38:38the Labour Party's against prisoners' votes, the judges ruled
0:38:38 > 0:38:43against you, the House of Commons has ruled against you and yet
0:38:43 > 0:38:50this country still has to do it because a European Court has ruled that way?
0:38:50 > 0:38:53And so this country should. You're forgetting that
0:38:53 > 0:38:58I took the whole state to court, the whole state was found guilty
0:38:58 > 0:39:04for a human rights abuse, by the highest court in Europe.
0:39:05 > 0:39:08We signed up to abide by both the Convention
0:39:08 > 0:39:11and the European Court decision.
0:39:11 > 0:39:15We have an obligation, legally and morally, to abide by that
0:39:15 > 0:39:17and we're not doing it.
0:39:17 > 0:39:21So these MPs who are keep trying to wriggle their way off the hook,
0:39:21 > 0:39:24they need to look at their selves, look at their consciences
0:39:24 > 0:39:26and say, "Do I really believe in human rights?"
0:39:26 > 0:39:30# I shot the sheriff.. #
0:39:30 > 0:39:33I've got the...joint...
0:39:33 > 0:39:37- I've got the bottle of champagne... - After one particular victory in the case,
0:39:37 > 0:39:41Mr Hirst posted this video of himself celebrating on YouTube.
0:39:41 > 0:39:43CHAMPAGNE CORK POPS
0:39:43 > 0:39:44Ha! Ha!
0:39:44 > 0:39:50And I'm now going to celebrate for the 75,000 prisoners
0:39:50 > 0:39:51who WILL be getting the vote.
0:39:51 > 0:39:55That includes murderers, rapists, paedophiles, all of them will be
0:39:55 > 0:39:58getting the vote because it's their human right to have the vote.
0:39:58 > 0:40:02Cheers!
0:40:04 > 0:40:05Oh, that's lovely.
0:40:06 > 0:40:08HE INHALES DEEPLY
0:40:08 > 0:40:10Ahhh!
0:40:10 > 0:40:13# I shot the sheriff! #
0:40:16 > 0:40:21When you won in Strasbourg, you posted a YouTube video.
0:40:21 > 0:40:25For a lot of people that discredits human rights.
0:40:25 > 0:40:29No, you're totally missing the point, right.
0:40:29 > 0:40:33I was convicted of manslaughter. I won the human right to vote.
0:40:33 > 0:40:36Now that's manslaughter before you start.
0:40:36 > 0:40:39After my case, it was Vogel versus Austria,
0:40:39 > 0:40:42in which a person was convicted of murder was told
0:40:42 > 0:40:44he was entitled to the human right to vote, right.
0:40:44 > 0:40:46Then you've got Greens
0:40:46 > 0:40:51and MT versus UK, Greens is a rapist, MT's a paedophile
0:40:51 > 0:40:55- Hold on a minute.- I understand all these.- Wait a minute let me.
0:40:55 > 0:40:58No, you don't. Please let me finish the point.
0:40:58 > 0:41:01So what you've got is a murderer, manslaughter, rapist,
0:41:01 > 0:41:04paedophile, all told they've got a human right to vote.
0:41:04 > 0:41:07How can you turn round and say that it is wrong?
0:41:07 > 0:41:09The highest court in Europe
0:41:09 > 0:41:13has stated that those categories can have the vote.
0:41:13 > 0:41:16So the UK cannot turn round and say, "They can't have the vote."
0:41:16 > 0:41:17The court said they can.
0:41:17 > 0:41:19Let me repeat my question and see if,
0:41:19 > 0:41:22if you would do me the favour of answering it?
0:41:22 > 0:41:26But what I'm saying is you understand, when you see that human rights rulings
0:41:26 > 0:41:31have allowed you to claim that it's now time for murderers,
0:41:31 > 0:41:36rapists and paedophiles to celebrate, that that risks undermining
0:41:36 > 0:41:41the very concept of human rights in a lot of ordinary people's eyes?
0:41:41 > 0:41:44I refer you to the answer I just gave you a few moments ago.
0:41:44 > 0:41:48Now if you can't accept the truth of an answer then I'm sorry. The reality
0:41:48 > 0:41:52is the highest court in Europe has ruled that murderers, rapists,
0:41:52 > 0:41:56people convicted of manslaughter are entitled to the human right to vote.
0:41:56 > 0:42:00So my speaking out in favour of that is not undermining it at all.
0:42:00 > 0:42:04- What is undermining it... - I think Mr Hirst is engaging in some wishful thinking here.
0:42:04 > 0:42:08- You can't use it?- It is a simple answer but if you're too stupid to understand it.
0:42:08 > 0:42:09That I may be.
0:42:09 > 0:42:12But by ignoring Strasbourg's decision, the Government is in
0:42:12 > 0:42:16- a very difficult position. - You cannot go into Europe and not play ball.
0:42:16 > 0:42:20- You have to play ball. - OK. I think we'll leave it there.
0:42:20 > 0:42:23THE PRISONER THEME PLAYS
0:42:27 > 0:42:31In 2010, the European Court warned that it could start to award
0:42:31 > 0:42:35compensation to prisoners who still didn't have the vote.
0:42:38 > 0:42:42Unless the British Government complies, the court could tell it
0:42:42 > 0:42:45to start writing cheques to prisoners in compensation.
0:42:45 > 0:42:49Cheques to prisoners because of their human rights.
0:42:49 > 0:42:51That'll go down well in the age of austerity.
0:42:51 > 0:42:55Votes for prisoners, freedom for Abu Qatada - they've brought
0:42:55 > 0:42:59Westminster to boiling point over human rights, even producing
0:42:59 > 0:43:02loud calls for them to be scrapped outright.
0:43:04 > 0:43:07ON THE BUSES THEME PLAYS
0:43:07 > 0:43:10The sight of one of London's rare icons brings out
0:43:10 > 0:43:12the romantic in most of us. Just ask Boris.
0:43:14 > 0:43:17He got rid of those nasty German bendy buses,
0:43:17 > 0:43:21saying we could rely on our own British tradition, a good old Routemaster.
0:43:21 > 0:43:25A similar approach to the Tory MP leading the clamour
0:43:25 > 0:43:28against Strasbourg, who thinks we can rely on British tradition
0:43:28 > 0:43:34to preserve our human rights and have no need for any European import.
0:43:34 > 0:43:37So what better vehicle to meet him in Westminster?
0:43:39 > 0:43:42Hello, Mr Davies. Come and have a seat?
0:43:42 > 0:43:45- Thank you.- So you want to scrap all human rights laws?
0:43:46 > 0:43:48I want to scrap the Human Rights Act
0:43:48 > 0:43:52and I want to withdraw from the European Convention of Human Rights.
0:43:52 > 0:43:57But our rights as British citizens are enshrined in history,
0:43:57 > 0:43:59through Magna Carta, through the Bill of Rights,
0:43:59 > 0:44:01through habeas corpus, through common law.
0:44:01 > 0:44:03I don't want to scrap all of that I just want to scrap
0:44:03 > 0:44:07the Human Rights Act and withdraw from the European Convention of Human Rights.
0:44:07 > 0:44:10So you don't think we need the European Convention on Rights?
0:44:10 > 0:44:11To look after our rights?
0:44:11 > 0:44:16We don't. Our rights go way back way before the Human Rights Act and before the European Convention.
0:44:16 > 0:44:20And you don't even feel that we need our right codified in,
0:44:20 > 0:44:23in a British Human Rights Law?
0:44:23 > 0:44:25No, I mean they were in the Bill of Rights, I guess,
0:44:25 > 0:44:29in the 17th century but I think our laws are such that
0:44:29 > 0:44:34we don't need to have a new British Bill of Rights or a Human Rights Act.
0:44:34 > 0:44:37It's completely superfluous to requirements.
0:44:37 > 0:44:41But if we pulled out of the Convention, we would be
0:44:41 > 0:44:46categorised with Belarus in Europe, the only other country that isn't
0:44:46 > 0:44:52part of it and Belarus is one of the world's nastiest dictatorships?
0:44:52 > 0:44:54Is that who we want to be along side?
0:44:54 > 0:44:58I'm not interested in which other countries are in the Human... the Convention of Human Rights
0:44:58 > 0:45:01and which ones aren't in the Convention of Human Rights.
0:45:01 > 0:45:02I'm interested in what we do in this country
0:45:02 > 0:45:07and what's right for the public in this country and Belarus don't have
0:45:07 > 0:45:10Magna Carta, they don't have habeas corpus, they don't have the
0:45:10 > 0:45:15Bill of Rights in the 17th century, they don't have the same history we have.
0:45:15 > 0:45:17So it's completely meaningless to look at
0:45:17 > 0:45:21what other countries are doing because they don't have the same heritage that we do.
0:45:35 > 0:45:36So is Philip Davies right?
0:45:36 > 0:45:38Do we have laws in place already, Great British laws,
0:45:38 > 0:45:41which protect our Human Rights?
0:45:52 > 0:45:56OK. Clearly, there's a problem. From grieving parents to
0:45:56 > 0:46:00disempowered politicians, from worried policemen even to
0:46:00 > 0:46:05some human rights activists themselves, there's widespread concern
0:46:05 > 0:46:11about the way human rights are working out in practice.
0:46:11 > 0:46:15So say some, "Why bother with the Strasbourg Court or even the
0:46:15 > 0:46:21"European Convention after all isn't Britain the home of Human Rights?
0:46:21 > 0:46:23"Didn't we invent them?"
0:46:25 > 0:46:28As every school boy used to know, the rights of every free born
0:46:28 > 0:46:31Englishman and since the Act of Union, even Scotsmen like me,
0:46:31 > 0:46:35are guaranteed by these words, Magna Carta.
0:46:35 > 0:46:39Also known at the time as The Great Charter of English Liberties.
0:46:39 > 0:46:42It was signed here in Runnymede by King John,
0:46:42 > 0:46:46under duress in June 1215.
0:46:47 > 0:46:51And it's true. Many of the great phrases in this charter
0:46:51 > 0:46:55still echo down the ages.
0:46:55 > 0:46:58"No free man should be seized or imprisoned,
0:46:58 > 0:47:01"or stripped of his rights or possessions.
0:47:01 > 0:47:05"Nor will we proceed against or prosecute except by
0:47:05 > 0:47:08"the lawful judgment of his peers.
0:47:08 > 0:47:15"To no-one will we sell or deny or delay a right of justice."
0:47:15 > 0:47:17So you can see why some people say,
0:47:17 > 0:47:20"If you've got the Magna Carta, what else do you need?"
0:47:21 > 0:47:24Romantics see it as a list of rights that needs to be
0:47:24 > 0:47:30protected from Strasbourg, albeit written in medieval Latin.
0:47:30 > 0:47:35But was Magna Carta really a medieval Bill of Rights for the king's subjects?
0:47:35 > 0:47:38What do you think is the popular perception of the Magna Carta?
0:47:38 > 0:47:42We see it as being this founding document of British democracy.
0:47:42 > 0:47:45We see it as this, this really seminal moment in
0:47:45 > 0:47:49our island story and the problem is really kind of separating out that
0:47:49 > 0:47:54myth from the reality of what Magna Carta actually amounts to now.
0:47:54 > 0:47:57Some people in Britain say, "What, what need do we have of
0:47:57 > 0:48:02"a European Convention on Human Rights? We have the Magna Carta, the original."
0:48:04 > 0:48:08We do. The problem with that is that that document,
0:48:08 > 0:48:13only about four clauses of it are now actually part of English law
0:48:13 > 0:48:17and only one of those has actually any relevance to human rights,
0:48:17 > 0:48:22this is chapter 29 and that's seen as protecting rights such as,
0:48:22 > 0:48:24right to trial by jury,
0:48:24 > 0:48:28freedom from arbitrary imprisonment, right to due process at law.
0:48:28 > 0:48:32Now the problem with that with this is that even that chapter
0:48:32 > 0:48:34when you look at how it operates in practice,
0:48:34 > 0:48:37those rights often aren't upheld.
0:48:37 > 0:48:41So we have Magna Carta, the 1689 Bill of Rights,
0:48:41 > 0:48:46the glorious tradition of English common law but history tells us
0:48:46 > 0:48:48that what Parliament gives, Parliament can take away
0:48:48 > 0:48:53and it more than happy to overrule our rights whenever it suits.
0:48:53 > 0:48:56If you look back through British history, you'll see that,
0:48:56 > 0:48:59actually, Parliament's been able to override
0:48:59 > 0:49:01Magna Carta rights on a number of occasions -
0:49:01 > 0:49:06suspensions of habeas corpus in the 18th and 19th centuries,
0:49:06 > 0:49:09meaning that the Government could actually imprison people
0:49:09 > 0:49:12without charge and they were actually imprisoning people
0:49:12 > 0:49:14who were agitating for democratic rights.
0:49:14 > 0:49:17So they were actually kind of suppressing the will of the people.
0:49:17 > 0:49:19- The very rights they were meant to be protecting.- Yes.
0:49:19 > 0:49:22- Yes, exactly.- So what would you say to those who get
0:49:22 > 0:49:26all misty-eyed here at Runnymede, that, we have our rights
0:49:26 > 0:49:31in the Magna Carta, what need do we have of rights from Strasbourg?
0:49:31 > 0:49:34I think what I'd say is that it's all very well getting misty-eyed
0:49:34 > 0:49:38about what people think Magna Carta amounts to but what Magna Carta
0:49:38 > 0:49:45- ACTUALLY amounts to in terms of British law is pretty much sweet FA! - That bad?- Yeah.
0:50:01 > 0:50:03There you have it.
0:50:03 > 0:50:06It's not as easy as the political romantics think.
0:50:06 > 0:50:09You can't just tear up the Human Rights Act
0:50:09 > 0:50:11and dust down the Magna Carta.
0:50:11 > 0:50:14So I'm going to put on my best good Queen Bess act
0:50:14 > 0:50:17and sail down the Thames to Parliament to see
0:50:17 > 0:50:22if there is any way we can restore public trust in human rights laws.
0:50:23 > 0:50:24Here's the dilemma.
0:50:24 > 0:50:28We're not keen on being told what to do by foreign judges.
0:50:28 > 0:50:30We're not even keen on British judges when they interpret
0:50:30 > 0:50:35the Human Rights Act in ways that are uber-compliant with Strasbourg.
0:50:36 > 0:50:41So do we need a solution that is modern but quintessentially British?
0:50:41 > 0:50:46A sort of Kate Middleton or Daniel Craig of Human Rights Laws?
0:50:50 > 0:50:55- Geoffrey Robertson certainly thinks so.- I'll get my hair in place.
0:50:55 > 0:50:58I did have a coffee coming but...
0:50:58 > 0:51:01Now even this pillar of the liberal legal establishment
0:51:01 > 0:51:04thinks it's time to have a British Bill of Rights.
0:51:04 > 0:51:07A set of human rights laws specifically tailored
0:51:07 > 0:51:08to our traditions.
0:51:10 > 0:51:13What's wrong with the European Convention on Human Rights?
0:51:13 > 0:51:16First thing, it's European.
0:51:16 > 0:51:20It's not rooted in the British struggle, particularly the struggle
0:51:20 > 0:51:25that gave this country before any other, abolition of torture,
0:51:25 > 0:51:30parliamentary sovereignty, independence of the judges and so forth.
0:51:30 > 0:51:33The second thing is that it's from 1950.
0:51:33 > 0:51:36It was a wonder of its time but that time was 1950.
0:51:38 > 0:51:40We need an updated Bill of Rights,
0:51:40 > 0:51:45the European Convention is past its use by date, we've moved on.
0:51:45 > 0:51:46We need better rights,
0:51:46 > 0:51:53we need a Bill of Rights that people can relate to, this is our heritage
0:51:53 > 0:51:57and by writing it down by a preamble, written not
0:51:57 > 0:52:01by lawyers but by historians and poets, you would actually inspire people
0:52:01 > 0:52:06- and explain why rights are important...- That came out of our experience?
0:52:06 > 0:52:08That can out of our experience.
0:52:09 > 0:52:13On the surface the idea of a British Bill of Rights sounds attractive.
0:52:13 > 0:52:17The Tories certainly think so. They've made it their official party policy
0:52:17 > 0:52:21but it's also their policy to stay inside the European Convention.
0:52:24 > 0:52:27They can't get round the fact that no matter how inspiring
0:52:27 > 0:52:31or modern a British Bill of Rights was, it would still be subservient
0:52:31 > 0:52:34to the European Convention and the Strasbourg Court.
0:52:34 > 0:52:38And with the Strasbourg Court still in ultimate charge,
0:52:38 > 0:52:42there would still be plenty to annoy us, prisoners would still get the vote,
0:52:42 > 0:52:46we still couldn't deport Abu Qatada and we still couldn't expel
0:52:46 > 0:52:51foreign criminals who run children down and leave them to die on the street.
0:52:53 > 0:52:55Just why would we need to stay in Strasbourg
0:52:55 > 0:52:58if we had our own British Bill of Rights?
0:53:00 > 0:53:03I want to put that to the Government Minister responsible.
0:53:03 > 0:53:08Can we just be clear that in the party scheme of things that
0:53:08 > 0:53:13a British Bill of Rights would be in addition to,
0:53:13 > 0:53:15not instead of the European Convention?
0:53:15 > 0:53:20A British Bill of Rights must be compatible with adherence
0:53:20 > 0:53:21with the Convention.
0:53:21 > 0:53:25If it were not, then it would lead to constant difficulties
0:53:25 > 0:53:27and cases going to Strasbourg in large numbers.
0:53:27 > 0:53:31But it wouldn't replace the Convention that's my point?
0:53:31 > 0:53:34It was never intended that it should replace the Convention.
0:53:34 > 0:53:37I would have thought the consequences of pulling out of the Convention,
0:53:37 > 0:53:40thereby undermining it as a document applying
0:53:40 > 0:53:44right across the civilised areas of Europe would be very damaging to us.
0:53:44 > 0:53:46It would be damaging to the development of human rights
0:53:46 > 0:53:50in the countries, which need the Convention, particularly
0:53:50 > 0:53:52to improve their standards and I think ultimately it would be
0:53:52 > 0:53:57damaging to us because whatever short-term benefits
0:53:57 > 0:54:01it might confer in terms of easing some of the debate, I don't think
0:54:01 > 0:54:04it would actually, ultimately resolve all the questions.
0:54:04 > 0:54:07If, as been suggested, we would still have
0:54:07 > 0:54:10a national Bill of Rights, with incorporated the Convention but simply applied
0:54:10 > 0:54:14it here, there would still inevitably be tensions with our own national courts
0:54:14 > 0:54:18applying rights, which sometimes people would object to.
0:54:18 > 0:54:22Not only would the Tories' British Bill of Rights still be subservient
0:54:22 > 0:54:26to Strasbourg but it ain't gonna happen this side of an election.
0:54:26 > 0:54:28The Lib Dems won't have it!
0:54:28 > 0:54:31The only thing the Coalition can agree on is
0:54:31 > 0:54:35pressing for reform of how the European Court works day to day.
0:54:36 > 0:54:40Now is their big chance for change. Britain's currently
0:54:40 > 0:54:43the head of the Council of Europe but only until May.
0:54:43 > 0:54:47Ministers want more cases left to national courts with only
0:54:47 > 0:54:51the most serious going to Strasbourg but all 47 member states will
0:54:51 > 0:54:55need to agree and achieving that is like herding cats.
0:54:55 > 0:54:58Does the Government really think it can deliver change?
0:55:00 > 0:55:02What reforms will have been achieved by May?
0:55:02 > 0:55:05By May, we'll have a declaration, a declaration,
0:55:05 > 0:55:09which sets the course of the reforms that we need to take place.
0:55:09 > 0:55:11It was never on the cards that within the six months,
0:55:11 > 0:55:14suddenly there would be changes to the Convention.
0:55:14 > 0:55:15So the actual changes won't take place?
0:55:15 > 0:55:17We've had declarations before?
0:55:17 > 0:55:20- Yes but those declarations.- We've had them all.
0:55:20 > 0:55:23So there will actually be no change have taken place
0:55:23 > 0:55:24by the time we lose it?
0:55:24 > 0:55:26But the declaration is quite an important thing
0:55:26 > 0:55:31I understand that that it does lead many to suggest that major reform
0:55:31 > 0:55:33is a distant pipe dream. It isn't going to happen.
0:55:33 > 0:55:36No, it's not a pipe dream. There I disagree with you.
0:55:36 > 0:55:39- But it's not going to happen?- Well I think it's going to happen.
0:55:39 > 0:55:47We're out of the driving seat in May, in comes Albania, then Andorra, not exactly great legal powers.
0:55:47 > 0:55:53Looming on the horizon Azerbaijan, a well-know defender of human rights.
0:55:53 > 0:55:57You can't maintain the momentum for reform with these countries?
0:55:57 > 0:56:03I'm not sure I agree about that. I think that's a misunderstanding of the way the Council of Europe works.
0:56:03 > 0:56:07If there is a widespread desire for this reform programme to be
0:56:07 > 0:56:11taken forward, I don't see any reason why the momentum should be lost.
0:56:13 > 0:56:16I doubt a statement of intent about reforming Strasbourg is
0:56:16 > 0:56:21going to satisfy the clamour for fundamental change I've heard
0:56:21 > 0:56:23loud and clear on my journey.
0:56:25 > 0:56:29As a British-born subject who's proud to be British, is that
0:56:29 > 0:56:31not what we stand for?
0:56:31 > 0:56:34Certainly, to stand up against what is clearly wrong.
0:56:34 > 0:56:38Who is running this country, the judges or the Government?
0:56:43 > 0:56:47If the Government brings in legislation, where it puts the right
0:56:47 > 0:56:50of the victim before the rights of the criminal, then I can say that
0:56:50 > 0:56:54we've maybe made a Human Rights Act that is something we can genuinely
0:56:54 > 0:56:58be proud of, as a nation and something that benefits everybody.
0:56:58 > 0:57:02And then I can say something good's come from Amy's death.
0:57:02 > 0:57:03There is one thing we could do,
0:57:03 > 0:57:06which might just fulfil Paul's dream.
0:57:06 > 0:57:10We could have a new Bill of Rights that includes all those
0:57:10 > 0:57:12freedoms Churchill enshrined in the Convention
0:57:12 > 0:57:16and adds other distinctly British rights like trial by jury.
0:57:16 > 0:57:19But it would only amount to real change if we did it outside
0:57:19 > 0:57:23the Strasbourg system and we resigned from the Convention.
0:57:25 > 0:57:27If you don't like the way human rights have evolved under
0:57:27 > 0:57:32Strasbourg's tender care, that's probably the most logical conclusion
0:57:32 > 0:57:37and we could do it but it would come at a price.
0:57:38 > 0:57:41Britain leaving would weaken the Convention.
0:57:41 > 0:57:46We'd disappoint those who look to us to set an example and we'd be used by those,
0:57:46 > 0:57:50with bad human rights records, as an excuse to ignore Strasbourg.
0:57:52 > 0:57:53So there you have it.
0:57:53 > 0:57:56We face a choice - to satisfy the growing domestic
0:57:56 > 0:57:59clamour for change, you need to run the risk of becoming,
0:57:59 > 0:58:04at least for a time, something of an international legal pariah.
0:58:04 > 0:58:07And despite the public's disquiet about human rights,
0:58:07 > 0:58:11most mainstream politicians on the left or the right,
0:58:11 > 0:58:15simply aren't prepared to go that far.
0:58:15 > 0:58:17Don't let the politicians or the judges or the lawyers
0:58:17 > 0:58:24fudge the issue - it is a stark choice and one we have yet to face up to.
0:58:24 > 0:58:26Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd