Human rights laws do not need fixing, according to the former president of the Supreme Court.
Baroness Hale of Richmond, who retired last year, told MPs and peers there is “not a problem” with the Human Rights Act and she cannot think of a fix that would make the legislation better as “opposed to potentially making things worse”.
The Government has appointed former Court of Appeal judge Sir Peter Gross to consider whether the Act needs to be reformed, some 20 years after it was brought into force.
Findings from the review are expected to be published in the summer.
Meanwhile, Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights has launched an inquiry into the Government’s review.
Human rights laws have been “very beneficial” in improving standards even though some cases can be “irksome” and “costly” for the government, according to a former attorney general.
Dominic Grieve QC said the Human Rights Act had made public bodies “pay attention to human rights in making decisions, particularly those affecting the old, vulnerable and children” and has led to an “improvement in standards.”
Mr Grieve, who was in post between 2010 and 2014, made the comments after the Government confirmed former Court of Appeal judge Sir Peter Gross would lead a panel to consider whether the Act needs to be reformed, some 20 years after it was brought into force.
Human rights laws have been “very beneficial” in improving standards even though some cases can be “irksome” and “costly” for the government, according to a former attorney general.
Dominic Grieve QC said the Human Rights Act had made public bodies “pay attention to human rights in making decisions, particularly those affecting the old, vulnerable and children” and has led to an “improvement in standards.”
Mr Grieve, who was in post between 2010 and 2014, made the comments after the Government confirmed former Court of Appeal judge Sir Peter Gross would lead a panel to consider whether the Act needs to be reformed, some 20 years after it was brought into force.
Human rights laws have been “very beneficial” in improving standards even though some cases can be “irksome” and “costly” for the government, according to a former attorney general.
Dominic Grieve QC said the Human Rights Act had made public bodies “pay attention to human rights in making decisions, particularly those affecting the old, vulnerable and children” and has led to an “improvement in standards.”
Mr Grieve, who was in post between 2010 and 2014, made the comments after the Government confirmed former Court of Appeal judge Sir Peter Gross would lead a panel to consider whether the Act needs to be reformed, some 20 years after it was brought into force.
Human rights laws have been “very beneficial” in improving standards even though some cases can be “irksome” and “costly” for the government, according to a former attorney general.
Dominic Grieve QC said the Human Rights Act had made public bodies “pay attention to human rights in making decisions, particularly those affecting the old, vulnerable and children” and has led to an “improvement in standards.”
Mr Grieve, who was in post between 2010 and 2014, made the comments after the Government confirmed former Court of Appeal judge Sir Peter Gross would lead a panel to consider whether the Act needs to be reformed, some 20 years after it was brought into force.