Rights and Responsibilities

Living in Britain we could be forgiven for taking our human rights for granted. Living in Britain we take as read our right to free speech, our right to a fair trial, our right to freedom from slavery, our right to life itself but there are many counties in the world where people do not have such privileges. Yet in Britain, while organisations like Amnesty International may campaign on behalf of those people in other countries who cannot rely on receiving the most fundamental of human rights, there are other groups who would suggest that Britain discontinue adherence to the European Convention on Human Rights. These are not all crackpot, ultra radical groups (although some are); they have included politicians of most political hues. For instance in 2007, while leader of the opposition  David Cameron said, " "It (the Human Rights Act) has to go. Abolish the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights, which sets out rights and responsibilities."

Cameron was prompted to make his comments following the case of Italian-born Learco Chindamo, convicted of the murder of head teacher Philip Lawrence, but who escaped deportation on human rights grounds and this has been by no means the only case that has enraged politicians, law makers and the general public. For instance, in 2011 the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) prevented Britain from deporting Abdisamad Sufi, a Somalian who was in Britain illegally and who had been convicted of 17 offences, including include burglary, fraud, making threats to kill and indecent exposure. The ECHR ruled that it would not be safe to return Sufi to Somalia, that his human rights would be infringed. In the case of another Somalian, Mustafa Abdi was awarded damages by the EHRC on the basis that his human rights were breached after his detention pending deportation having being sentenced to eight years imprisonment for the rape of a child.

Philip Lawrence (left) was murdered by Learco Chindamo.

 It is a common complaint that lawmakers appear more concerned with the rights of offenders than those of the victims and cases like those of Sufi, Abdi and Chindamo support that view. Of themselves these cases, and others like them do not however justify  scrapping human rights legislation, rather the suggest that it needs some amendment; in fact to some degree one might argue that it merely needs to be applied properly.

Behind the right wing hyperbole there are very real concerns that human rights legislation is being misused.

In 2006 the Department for Constitutional Affairs issued A Guide to the Human Rights Act and there is a key and very telling paragraph in the very first section of the guide; it says:

1.8 The first part of these Articles sets out the right and is followed by a second part describing how the right may need to be limited. For example, everyone’s interest in combating crime and promoting public health is mentioned several times as a reason why public authorities might need to limit an individual’s right. That kind of thinking is behind the statement that rights and responsibilities go together. The whole system of respecting rights works best when people recognise that and act responsibly towards others and the wider community. 

There you have it; an individual's rights may be limited in combating crime; commit a crime and your human rights may be restricted. It is telling that both this document, and David Cameron in his remarks back in 2007, mention responsibilities. This is a word all too infrequently used when human rights are discussed; indeed responsibilities are all too rarely mentioned in society these days, unless it is someone bleating about other people's responsibilities; other people's, but never their own, yet without meeting their responsibilities do people deserve their rights? Human rights are part of a contract that we have with the state, the government of the day and society as a whole. In exchange for these rights we have responsibilities; responsibilities to respect the rule of law and the rights of others.  Those who ignore their responsibilities, who infringe or ignore the rights of others, forfeit their rights. It is iniquitous that offenders seek to hid behind the very rights that they themselves have ignored or held with such little regard when they apply to their victims.

What regard did of Sufi, Abdi and Chindamo pay to the human rights of their victims? None; yet each of them, or more probably their lawyers', immediately played the human rights card when, having abdicated their responsibilities to society and committed their various crimes, they were caught and convicted. There is an old saying; "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime" which seems to no longer apply, being apparently over-ridden by the offenders' human rights.

This is not to say that I believe that we should not consider human rights, nor that we should stop upholding them, and certainly not that the Human Rights Act of 1998 should be repealed, merely that we should balance the rights that everyone, and that includes offenders, have against their responsibilities. Even Liberty, more formally known as the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL), who as you would imagine, are vociferous advocates of the Human Rights Act, may say " rights are universal and inalienable in nature" but also that " Human rights and responsibilities are inextricably bound together. Rights mean little if others do not take responsibility to protect them." This is where human rights legislation could be improved; in addition to setting out our rights, it needs to specify our responsibilities and just as importantly, the consequences should we ignore them.

In some ways there is a similar issue with respect. It is sadly the case that the media have all too often to report some incident of violence and even of death occasioned because some youth (and it is normally a youth or group of youths), feels that they have been disrespected in some way and metes out some violent retribution. Respect, like rights, is a two-way street; to get respect you have to give it; respecting yourself and others is the same as protecting other people's rights by meeting your responsibilities.

All too few people are willing to meet their responsibilities and their obligations, to respect other people and their rights. Too many people believe they have rights without responsibilities and when everyone has rights but no one has responsibilities, anarchy follows.