Breach Of Human Rights Case Study

The key area of law that this question is concerned with, is the breach of convention rights. Specifically on whether Tom and Soraya have a claim under the Human rights Act 1998, which incorporates the rights of the European convention of human rights into UK domestic law. It can be argued that from the number of issues raised in the problem that Tom and Soraya do have a sufficient claim. A number of facts can be highlighted from the case to underline this; Firstly, the possibility of discrimination and racism by the minister introducing the act with the reference to ‘dangerous west Africans’. As well as the possibility of racism and discrimination experienced by Tom with him being referred to as a ‘disease-ridden African’. Secondly in regards to the use of pictures taken from Soraya’s private Facebook account. Lastly, whether the terms within the act is compatible with convention rights and the UK’s obligation under Section 3(1) of the HRA.

Similar to ministers who were found to have made racist or discriminatory statements (most notably Enoch Powell in his ‘rivers of blood speech’ in 1968), the minister is most likely to face dismissal or pleas to resign, rather than there to be a cause of action under a breach of human rights. Parliament in theory has the ability to enact legislation that conflicts with convention rights and under section 19 of the Human rights act, even if compatibility of convention rights is not found government can still proceed with the bill. However the statement being made upon the introduction of legislation does bring to attention parliament’s intent, and further highlights the possibility of the act itself being a breach of convention rights. As a result consideration can be made to remedy or remove the