Understanding the Human Rights Act 1998


The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) was enacted to incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic British law, safeguarding fundamental rights and freedoms in the United Kingdom.

The Act is the mechanism through which human rights are protected and promoted in the UK, influencing a broad spectrum of issues from privacy and freedom of speech to discrimination.

Fundamentally, the Act ensures that individuals can defend their rights in UK courts and compels public organisations, including the government, local authorities, and the police, to treat everyone with fairness, equality and dignity.

In this guide we set out the key provisions of the Act, and consider the influence it continues to have across all aspects of life in the UK.


Section A: Overview of the Human Rights Act 1998


The Human Rights Act 1998 was designed to ensure that certain fundamental rights and freedoms are protected within the UK legal system. Since its introduction, it has reshaped the UK legal landscape, influencing not only how rights are protected but also how justice is administered. The Act represented a significant shift towards a more rights-based approach to governance and legal interpretation, ensuring that fundamental human rights are both recognised and actively enforced within the United Kingdom.


1. What is the Human Rights Act 1998?


The Human Rights Act 1998 was enacted by the UK Parliament and came into force in October 2000. It was a significant reform introduced by the Labour government under Prime Minister Tony Blair following their 1997 election victory.

The Act was designed to incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law, allowing British citizens to bring cases related to human rights in UK courts rather than having to go to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France. This shift was aimed at ensuring that rights were more accessible and enforceable at a local level.

This Act not only empowers individuals to challenge actions that infringe upon their rights directly in the UK courts but also obliges public bodies to act in compliance with the rights laid out in the ECHR, ensuring that human rights considerations are embedded in daily governance.


2. Key Provisions of the Act


The Human Rights Act 1998 is structured around several key provisions that reflect the articles of the ECHR. Notable provisions include:


a. Right to life (Article 2): Protects an individual’s right to life and sets out the circumstances under which deprivation of life may be justified.

b. Prohibition of torture (Article 3): Prevents individuals from being subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

c. Right to a fair trial (Article 6): Ensures that everyone has the right to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal.

d. Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8): Provides a right to respect for one’s “private and family life, home, and correspondence,” subject to certain restrictions that are “in accordance with law” and “necessary in a democratic society”.

e. Freedom of thought, conscience, and religion (Article 9); Freedom of expression (Article 10); and Right to assembly and association (Article 11)**: These articles collectively protect individuals’ freedoms to think, believe, express themselves, and assemble freely.


3. Objective of the Act


The primary goal of the Human Rights Act 1998 is to safeguard human rights and ensure their enforcement within the UK without the need for citizens to seek remedies from courts in Europe. This localisation of human rights protection aims to promote awareness and respect for human rights within all segments of government and society. It empowers individuals, contributes to the accountability of public authorities, and ensures that human rights are considered in the formulation and application of laws.

Additionally, the Act promotes a “culture of respect” for human rights in the UK, ensuring that these fundamental rights and freedoms are embedded in everyday life and governance. This reinforces the UK’s commitment to uphold both democratic values and international obligations concerning human rights protection.


Section B: Key Features of the Human Rights Act 1998


Through its essential elements and structural innovations, the HRA 1998 has made the rights and freedoms under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) accessible through UK courts, transforming how human rights are protected within Britain.


1. Defining Features of the HRA 1998


Key features of the Act include:


a. Direct Incorporation

The Act incorporates the rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) directly into UK law.


b. Right to Remedies

It allows individuals to seek remedies for rights violations in UK courts without needing to go to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.


c. Public Authority Obligations

The Act places a duty on all public authorities in the UK to act in accordance with the ECHR rights unless legislation explicitly requires them otherwise.


d. Interpretation of Legislation

It requires that all UK legislation be interpreted and given effect in a way that is compatible with the rights expressed in the ECHR, to the extent possible, given the wording of the statute.


2. Major Sections of the Act


a. Section 2: Interpretation of Convention Rights
This section requires courts in the UK to take into account the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights when determining issues relating to human rights. It ensures consistency with broader European human rights standards.


b. Section 3: Interpretation of Legislation
Section 3 is critical as it mandates that all legislation, both past and future, be read and given effect in a manner that is compatible with the Convention rights, as far as possible.


c. Section 4: Declaration of Incompatibility
If a court finds that it is not possible to interpret a legislative provision in a way that is compatible with the Convention rights, it can issue a “declaration of incompatibility.” This declaration does not invalidate the legislation but signals to Parliament that the law needs amending.


d. Section 6: Acts of Public Authorities
This section prohibits public authorities from acting in ways that are incompatible with the Convention rights, except where they are acting in accordance with legislation that cannot be read compatibly with the Convention.


e. Section 7: Proceedings
This section outlines who can bring proceedings in cases of rights violations and under what circumstances, essentially providing a direct route for individuals to challenge abuses of their rights.


3. Rights Protected Under the Act


The Human Rights Act protects a range of rights that mirror those in the ECHR, including:


a. Article 2: Right to Life – Guarantees the right to life and imposes an obligation on governments to prevent unlawful deaths.

b. Article 3: Prohibition of Torture – Ensures that no one is subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

c. Article 5: Right to Liberty and Security – Protects the right to personal liberty, specifying that no one can be deprived of their liberty without a lawful reason.

d. Article 8: Right to Respect for Private and Family Life – Safeguards privacy, family life, the home, and correspondence against unnecessary interference by the state.

e. Article 10: Freedom of Expression – Ensures that everyone has the right to express their views freely, subject to certain restrictions deemed necessary, such as for the protection of national security or public safety.

f. Article 11: Freedom of Assembly and Association – Protects the right to peaceful assembly and to associate with others, including forming and joining trade unions.


Section C: Impact on Modern UK Jurisprudence


The Human Rights Act 1998 has profoundly influenced both specific legal outcomes through its application in landmark cases and the broader landscape of UK jurisprudence and public administration. It continues to be a vital tool for the protection and enhancement of human rights within the UK.


1. Expansion of Judicial Review


The Act has significantly expanded the scope of judicial review, enabling courts to scrutinise the decisions of public bodies more rigorously to ensure they comply with human rights standards. This has led to a more robust system of checks and balances in UK governance.


2. Development of Proportionality Principle


UK courts have increasingly adopted the proportionality test, a principle not traditionally part of English law, as a result of the Human Rights Act. This requires that any act infringing on a right must be necessary, reasonable, and proportionate to the aims being pursued, providing a more nuanced approach to balancing rights and interests.


3. Cultural Shift in Legal and Public Sectors


There has been a notable cultural shift towards greater awareness and consideration of human rights in the legal and public sectors. Public authorities are now more conscious of human rights in their day-to-day operations, planning, and policymaking, leading to better governance and increased public accountability.


4. Influence on Legislation


The Human Rights Act has also influenced legislative processes, with lawmakers now considering the human rights implications of new laws more thoroughly to ensure compatibility with the Act from the outset. This proactive consideration has led to the creation of legislation that better respects and upholds the rights of individuals.


Section D: Notable Cases Influenced by the Human Rights Act 1998


1. A v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (2004)

This case challenged the UK government’s policy of indefinite detention of foreign nationals suspected of terrorism but who could not be deported. The Law Lords ruled that this was incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, specifically the right to liberty and security under Article 5. This led to the replacement of indefinite detention with control orders and, later, Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (TPIMs).


2. Hirst v. The United Kingdom (No 2) (2005)

The European Court of Human Rights held that the UK’s blanket ban on voting by prisoners violated the right to free elections (Protocol 1, Article 3 of the Convention). This case sparked a significant debate on prisoner voting rights and prompted ongoing discussions about reforming voting laws for incarcerated individuals.


3. R (on the application of Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2001)

This case involved the rights of prisoners to have confidential legal correspondence. The House of Lords utilised the Human Rights Act to establish a new principle of proportionality in the review of decisions affecting the rights under the Convention, leading to stronger protection for individual rights against administrative decisions.


4. Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza (2004)

This landmark ruling used the Human Rights Act to interpret the Rent Act 1977 in a way that granted same-sex partners the same rights as heterosexual couples regarding tenancy succession. This decision marked a significant step forward in the recognition of LGBTQ+ rights in the UK.


Section E: Criticisms and Support of the HRA 1998


The Human Rights Act 1998, while foundational in protecting human rights within the UK, has also been the subject of various controversies and criticisms from different quarters of society, while garnering support from others.


1. Criticisms of the HRA 1998


a. Sovereignty and Parliamentary Supremacy

One of the primary criticisms of the Human Rights Act comes from those concerned about national sovereignty. Critics argue that the Act diminishes the UK Parliament’s supremacy by allowing UK courts to challenge its decisions based on compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights. This controversy has been especially poignant in the context of Brexit, with some arguing that the Act represents an undue influence from European legal norms on British law.


b. Impact on the Justice System

Critics within the legal system and law enforcement argue that the Human Rights Act can impede effective policing and prosecution. For example, some have claimed that the Act makes it more difficult to deport foreign nationals who pose a security threat, as courts must consider their right to family life under Article 8 of the Convention. Others point to cases where the rights of criminals seem to be prioritised over the rights of victims.


c. Media and Freedom of Expression

The Act has also sparked debates in the realm of privacy versus freedom of expression, particularly concerning the media. High-profile cases involving celebrities and injunctions against publications (often termed “super-injunctions”) have led to criticisms that the Act can be used to suppress lawful journalism under the guise of protecting privacy.


2. Perspectives from Supporters


a. Protection and Promotion of Individual Rights
Supporters of the Human Rights Act emphasise its critical role in protecting the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals, especially the most vulnerable members of society. They argue that the Act has been instrumental in cases that protect civil liberties, enhance the rights of minority groups, and ensure that individuals have meaningful recourse against abuses by public authorities.


b. Accountability and Transparency
Advocates also highlight how the Act has increased accountability and transparency within public bodies. By compelling these bodies to make decisions that are compliant with human rights, the Act is seen as promoting a more just and equitable society. Supporters point out that, far from undermining parliamentary democracy, it enhances it by ensuring that all laws and actions are scrutinised through the lens of human rights.


c. Educational and Cultural Impact
From an educational perspective, the Act is credited with raising awareness and understanding of human rights among the British public and within the public sector. This cultural shift towards a greater respect for human rights is seen as a fundamental improvement in governance and civic interaction in the UK.


Section F: Comparison with Other Human Rights Legislation


The Human Rights Act 1998 has generally enhanced the UK’s reputation as a defender of human rights on the international stage. Its provisions align with international norms and standards found in other democracies, with additional unique aspects related to its incorporation of the ECHR.


1. United States – The Bill of Rights and Civil Rights Laws


In the United States, the Constitution’s Bill of Rights and subsequent civil rights laws serve as the primary protections for human rights.

Unlike the UK’s Human Rights Act, which is a modern legislative act specifically intended to incorporate an international treaty (the European Convention on Human Rights) into domestic law, the U.S. Bill of Rights is a foundational part of the country’s constitution. US rights protections are broadly embedded in the constitutional framework and further defined through extensive judicial review by the Supreme Court. This makes US human rights protections both broad in their historical and cultural context and deeply embedded in legal precedent.


2. Canada – The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms


The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is part of the Constitution Act of 1982 and guarantees fundamental freedoms, legal rights, and equality rights similar to those protected under the UK’s Human Rights Act.

However, the Charter has a “notwithstanding clause” that allows Parliament or provincial legislatures to override certain sections of the Charter temporarily, which is a significant difference from the UK model, where such parliamentary overrides are not possible.


3. European Union – The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union


The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights is similar to the UK’s Human Rights Act in that it consolidates various rights and freedoms into a single document. Enforceable since the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009, it has a direct effect on EU countries, meaning that its provisions can be enforced in the courts of member states.

While the UK was part of the EU, the Human Rights Act worked in parallel with the EU Charter, providing layered protections for UK citizens.


4. Germany – The Basic Law


Germany’s Basic Law (“Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland”) acts as the country’s constitution and includes a detailed catalogue of fundamental rights that closely resemble those in the European Convention on Human Rights. German constitutional rights have a strong emphasis on human dignity and are enforceable against the state.

The robust constitutional court system in Germany plays a crucial role in interpreting these rights, often setting precedents that influence broader European human rights jurisprudence.


Section G: Future of the Human Rights Act 1998


The future of the Human Rights Act 1998 has been a subject of considerable debate in the UK, influenced by political dynamics, proposed legal amendments, and expert opinions on the direction of human rights legislation.


1. Proposed Amendments and Political Pressures


a. Repeal and Replacement Proposals

One of the most significant political pressures facing the Human Rights Act is the proposal by various political figures, primarily within the Conservative Party, to repeal and replace it with a new “British Bill of Rights.” This proposal aims to assert more national control over legal judgments, which proponents argue would restore sovereignty and reduce external influence (notably from the European Court of Human Rights) on British courts. This debate intensified following Brexit, as it aligns with wider themes of taking back control and legislative independence from European institutions.


b. Potential Specific Reforms 

Proposed reforms often focus on limiting the scope of the Act to reduce what some critics see as its overreach into areas like UK immigration and national security. Suggestions include making it harder for foreign nationals to challenge deportations on human rights grounds and limiting the ability of prisoners to make claims under the Act.


2. Expert Opinions on the Evolution of the Act


a. Legal and Human Rights Experts

Many legal scholars and human rights advocates argue strongly against the repeal or watering down of the Human Rights Act. They contend that the Act plays a critical role in protecting fundamental human rights and that any weakening of the Act would harm the UK’s international reputation and its commitment to human rights.

Experts also note that the Act has provided a necessary means of redress against the state, helping to correct injustices and hold authorities accountable. They warn that replacing the Act with a British Bill of Rights could potentially lead to a loss of these protections, as the scope of any new legislation might be narrower.


b. Public Opinion and Civil Society

There is considerable support for the Human Rights Act among the public and various civil society groups, who see it as vital for protecting the vulnerable and preventing abuse of power. Campaigns by human rights organisations often emphasise the Act’s role in everyday situations, like ensuring elderly couples remain together in care homes or protecting soldiers’ rights.


3. Future Scenarios


The ongoing discussions about the Human Rights Act illustrate the dynamic and sometimes contentious nature of human rights protection in national contexts.

Looking ahead, the future of the Human Rights Act appears to hinge on several factors:


a. Political Will: The extent to which current and future governments push forward with plans to amend or replace the Act.

b. Public Advocacy and Response: How civil society and the general public respond to proposed changes, which could influence political decisions.

c. Legal Challenges: Any legal challenges that might arise from the amendment or repeal of the Act, including cases that might reach the European Court of Human Rights or domestic courts interpreting any new legislation.


As the UK continues to navigate its post-Brexit identity and legislative framework, the evolution of the Human Rights Act will likely remain a key issue in the broader debate about the balance between national sovereignty and international human rights obligations.


Section H: Summary


The Human Rights Act 1998 remains a pivotal piece of legislation within the UK, embodying the country’s commitment to uphold fundamental human rights and freedoms.

The Act has been instrumental in protecting the basic human rights of individuals within the UK. Incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic law allows citizens direct access to rights protections without the need to seek remedies from the European Court of Human Rights.

The Act ensures that all public authorities, including the government, police, and local councils, respect and uphold the rights enshrined in the Act. This accountability mechanism has been crucial in preventing abuses of power and promoting fairness and justice within public services.

The Human Rights Act has had a profound influence on both the development of new laws and the interpretation of existing ones. It requires that all legislation be interpreted in a way that is compatible with the rights protected under the Act, thereby embedding human rights considerations into the fabric of UK law.

Beyond its legal implications, the Act has promoted a broader cultural recognition of human rights within the UK. It has raised awareness among the public and within institutions about the importance of human rights, encouraging a culture of respect and dignity for all.

The Human Rights Act continues to be relevant in addressing contemporary issues and challenges. As society evolves, the Act provides a flexible and robust framework to address new human rights concerns, be they related to digital privacy, equality movements, or international human rights standards. Its role in ensuring that the UK’s responses to these issues are grounded in respect for human rights is more crucial than ever.

The Human Rights Act 1998 is more than just a legal document; it is a living guarantee of the values that the UK aspires to uphold. As debates continue about the future of the Act, whether it be amendments or a complete overhaul, it is vital to consider what stands to be gained or lost with each proposed change.

As the UK continues to redefine its relationship with European institutions and its own legal framework post-Brexit, the future of the Human Rights Act remains a pivotal and contentious issue in British political and legal discourse.


Section I: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About the Human Rights Act 1998


What is the Human Rights Act 1998?
The Human Rights Act 1998 is a UK law that was enacted to incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic British law. It allows people to defend their rights in UK courts and ensures that public bodies respect and protect human rights.


Why was the Human Rights Act 1998 introduced?
The Act was introduced to bring rights home, meaning that it allows individuals to seek redress for violations of their rights within the UK, without needing to go to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France. This was intended to make rights protection more accessible and practical for residents of the UK.


How does the Human Rights Act 1998 affect public authorities?
Public authorities, including local governments, police, and other state agencies, must comply with the rights outlined in the Act. This means they cannot act in ways that violate the rights protected under the Act and must consider these rights in their decision-making processes.


Can the Human Rights Act 1998 be overridden?
The Act contains provisions for Parliament to pass legislation that is incompatible with the rights in the Act, but such cases are rare. If UK legislation is found to be incompatible with the rights, courts can issue a declaration of incompatibility, which does not overturn the legislation but highlights the conflict for Parliament to address.


What are some key rights protected by the Human Rights Act 1998?
Key rights include the right to life, the right to a fair trial, protection from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, respect for private and family life, freedom of expression, and the right to marry and start a family.


How does the Human Rights Act 1998 impact ordinary people?
The Act impacts ordinary people by providing a legal basis to challenge actions that infringe on their human rights. This can range from cases of privacy violations, unfair dismissal, and discrimination to wrongful detention and more.


What happens if the Human Rights Act 1998 is repealed or replaced?
If the Act were repealed or replaced, the protection of human rights in the UK could potentially be altered depending on the scope and nature of the new legislation. Discussions about replacing the Act with a British Bill of Rights have included concerns about potentially reducing the scope of protections currently available under the Act.


Is the Human Rights Act 1998 only relevant to UK citizens?
No, the protections under the Act apply to everyone within the UK’s jurisdiction, not just British citizens. This includes foreign nationals, refugees, and visitors, ensuring that human rights standards are upheld for all individuals in the UK.


Section J: Glossary of Terms Related to the Human Rights Act 1998


European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR): A treaty established by the Council of Europe in 1950 to protect human rights and political freedoms in Europe. The Human Rights Act 1998 incorporates the rights from this treaty into UK law.

Declaration of Incompatibility: A formal statement issued by a UK court that a piece of legislation is not in accord with the Human Rights Act, specifically the rights set out in the ECHR. This does not invalidate the legislation but signals to Parliament that changes may be necessary.

Public Authorities: Organisations and bodies that perform public functions or services. Under the Human Rights Act, these include government departments, local authorities, and other entities like police forces and public schools, which are required to comply with the Act.

Proportionality: A principle used in human rights law to determine whether measures that infringe on rights can be legally justified. To be proportionate, a measure must be necessary, suitably executed to achieve its objective, and the least restrictive means available.

Judicial Review: A process through which courts examine the decisions, actions, or omissions of a public body to determine whether they are lawful, rational, and fair. The Human Rights Act enables courts to conduct judicial reviews against the backdrop of human rights standards.

Protocol 1, Article 3: An article under the First Protocol of the ECHR, which guarantees the right to free elections. This has been notably referenced in cases regarding prisoner voting rights in the UK.

Margin of Appreciation: A doctrine allowing national authorities a degree of discretion when applying the European Convention on Human Rights, based on the premise that local authorities have a better understanding of local needs and conditions.

Compatible/Incompatible: Terms used to describe whether UK laws align with or conflict with the rights and freedoms protected under the Human Rights Act and the ECHR. A law deemed incompatible may lead to a declaration of incompatibility.

Control Orders and TPIMs (Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures): Legal tools used to restrict the freedoms of individuals suspected of involvement in terrorism, intended as a less restrictive alternative to indefinite detention. These measures were influenced by human rights considerations under the Act.

European Court of Human Rights: A supranational court based in Strasbourg, France, that rules on individual or state applications alleging violations of the civil and political rights set out in the ECHR.


Section K: Additional Resources


This official database provides access to the full text of the Human Rights Act 1998, including explanatory notes and amendments.


UK Government Website
This government portal offers explanatory materials and guidance on how the Human Rights Act is applied within the UK, along with updates on any proposed reforms.


The British Institute of Human Rights
An organisation that provides resources, training, and guidance on human rights laws, particularly the Human Rights Act.


The Equality and Human Rights Commission
The UK’s national independent body that upholds and promotes human rights and equality. It offers a range of reports, guides, and case studies.


Council of Europe – European Court of Human Rights
For comprehensive resources on the European Convention on Human Rights and rulings of the European Court of Human Rights.


The House of Commons Library
Provides detailed research briefings that are useful for understanding the political and legislative context of the Human Rights Act.


Human Rights Law Association
An association that promotes knowledge and understanding of human rights and the law in the UK among a wide audience.



Founder and Managing Director Anne Morris is a fully qualified solicitor and trusted adviser to large corporates through to SMEs, providing strategic immigration and global mobility advice to support employers with UK operations to meet their workforce needs through corporate immigration.

She is a recognised by Legal 500 and Chambers as a legal expert and delivers Board-level advice on business migration and compliance risk management as well as overseeing the firm’s development of new client propositions and delivery of cost and time efficient processing of applications.

Anne is an active public speaker, immigration commentator, and immigration policy contributor and regularly hosts training sessions for employers and HR professionals

About DavidsonMorris

As employer solutions lawyers, DavidsonMorris offers a complete and cost-effective capability to meet employers’ needs across UK immigration and employment law, HR and global mobility.

Led by Anne Morris, one of the UK’s preeminent immigration lawyers, and with rankings in The Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners, we’re a multi-disciplinary team helping organisations to meet their people objectives, while reducing legal risk and nurturing workforce relations.

Legal Disclaimer

The matters contained in this article are intended to be for general information purposes only. This article does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a complete or authoritative statement of the law, and should not be treated as such. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information is correct at the time of writing, no warranty, express or implied, is given as to its accuracy and no liability is accepted for any error or omission. Before acting on any of the information contained herein, expert legal advice should be sought.

Contact DavidsonMorris
Get in touch with DavidsonMorris for general enquiries, feedback and requests for information.
Sign up to our award winning newsletters!
Find us on: