Lord Carnwath

An independent review of the Human Rights Act recommended subordinating Strasbourg case law to UK law.

The review, led by Sir Peter Gross, states: “By giving prior consideration to national law but continuing to take proper account of ECtHR [European Court of Human Rights] case law, it is designed to promote greater consistency in the application of section 2 by UK Courts and greater domestic political and public ownership of human rights, while giving full effect to the principle of subsidiarity and maintaining the beneficial equilibrium reached between UK Courts and the ECtHR.”

But Lord Carnwath of Notting Hill, who sat on the Supreme Court bench for eight years, told the Commons Justice Select Committee this week that he disagreed. 

He said: “They seem to be saying it would improve our feeling that the thing belongs to us if there was some sort of provision that says ‘Start off by looking at British law/common law, and then only if that’s not adequate go on to the convention’.”

“If the convention is going to give you rights, and you bring yourself within those rights, you should be able to rely on them. I don’t see why you should be looking around for some other common law equivalent.”

On the question of how the government’s proposals could alter the British courts’ approach to Strasbourg case law, he said: “I can’t predict, I’m afraid. Happily, I’m no longer there. If I was there, I would be very confused.

“We would go through a period where we would have hopeful advocates appearing in front of us, citing cases from all over the place. My own feeling is, one would eventually settle down and say, as these cases may go to Strasbourg, we’ve obviously got to keep in mind what they’re saying. I find it difficult to see how it’s meant to operate. I certainly think it’s not going to increase certainty, which is what the government seems to be saying.”