Attorney general highlights importance of human rights

The Attorney General, The Rt Hon Lord Hermer KC, delivered an insightful speech titled "The Implementation of Strasbourg Court Judgments at National Level – Subsidiarity in Action" during the Summer School in the Law of the Council of Europe. Speaking to a packed audience, he underscored the pressing challenges that Europe faces today, including conflicts, climate change, inequality, mass migration, and the rise of artificial intelligence. These complexities require a renewed commitment to a robust international rules-based system underpinned by the rule of law, which he described as the lodestar for governance.

In his opening remarks, the Attorney General acknowledged the topical relevance of the Summer School's theme, stressing the importance of addressing the effectiveness of the Council of Europe in confronting current challenges. He quoted Lord Bingham, saying, “one of the greatest unifying factors—perhaps the greatest—and as an ideal worth striving for, in the interests of good government and peace, at home and in the world at large.” This reflection highlights the universal validity of the rule of law as affirmed by the Venice Commission and endorsed by United Nations member states.

The speech detailed the intricacies of the European Convention on Human Rights, emphasising its foundational role in establishing a common understanding of rights across nations. The Attorney General noted that national authorities bear primary responsibility for implementing these rights within their unique contexts, a principle enshrined in the concept of subsidiarity. He stated authority lies with member states to ensure effective compliance with the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights.

Crucially, he addressed the language used to describe the process following a court judgment. The term “execution of judgments” could lead to misunderstanding among the public, so he advocated for the term “implementation” to more accurately reflect the democratic responsibilities of national authorities. As he explained, “the obligation to comply with Court judgments... is a crucial foundation of the international legal order in Europe.”

The Attorney General elaborated on the UK's track record, noting its low rate of violations and high compliance with the European Court’s judgments. He introduced the role of the Human Rights Act of 1998 in facilitating this compliance, highlighting the shared responsibility between different branches of government, particularly the Executive and Parliament, in responding to adverse judgments. The Joint Committee on Human Rights serves as a pivotal mechanism for scrutinising government responses and promoting public debate on human rights matters.

A notable example was presented regarding the case of Big Brother Watch and Others v the UK, where government responses to a court ruling demonstrated the collaborative approach employed in the UK. The Attorney General posited that such processes epitomise subsidiarity in action, allowing for the nuanced balancing of national interests with the obligations arising from international law.

In conclusion, he reinforced the importance of correctly framing the conversation around the implementation of court judgments in order to enhance public confidence in the legitimacy of the legal system. He stated that there is “no justice for victims if judgments are not enforced” and called for meaningful political dialogue to ensure the effective and appropriate responses to Strasbourg Court rulings. This approach, he argued, underlines the dynamic relationship between national sovereignty and universal human rights within the context of a democratic society.