Ministers want Britain\u2019s judges to interpret human rights not in the light of present day conditions, but those of the 1950s<\/p>\n
The government \u201cshould not proceed<\/a>\u201d with its bill of rights. That was the withering judgment delivered last week on Dominic Raab\u2019s proposals by parliament\u2019s joint committee on human rights. MPs and peers assessed the bill and correctly decided that the ideal outcome for the country was to drop the deeply flawed legislation. It\u2019s not a bill of rights so much as a bill of wrongs. The cross-party committee said the justice secretary\u2019s proposals would reduce the protections currently provided, make it harder to enforce human rights, and show contempt for international obligations.<\/p>\n The Conservative party in its present guise is determined to free the executive from accountability, and Mr Raab\u2019s ideas are part of a power grab that includes attempts to restrict judicial review, the right of protest<\/a> and freedom of expression. Making his bill law would see Britain turn its back on the gains made by human rights legislation. Major advances<\/a> made by disabled people, same\u2010sex couples and Windrush victims would never have occurred under these proposals.<\/p>\n