The Nationalities and Borders Act, dubbed the ‘anti-refugee’ bill, has now passed.  The Bill was condemned widely by civil society in the UK and by the United Nations. It is a broadside attack on the rights of those who have fled wars, conflict, and persecution and seek refuge in the UK. In addition, the law fails to introduce new routes for people fleeing war and persecution to claim asylum in the UK and so leaves people vulnerable to exploitation and reliant upon criminal gangs to reach safety. It is an attack on those already experiencing huge violations of their rights. As noted by Together with Refugees,

“This bill will punish refugees who have been left with no other options [but] to find safety from war and persecution by taking dangerous journeys to get to the UK, and it will criminalise people for simply trying. It’s completely at odds with the UN Refugee Convention and will see the UK renege on our international obligations.”

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts (PCSC) Act has now passed. The legislation, which Liberty has categorised as, “discriminatory and authoritarian” represents an attack on the right to protest, which is protected by Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Freedom of Assembly).

Protest, particularly protest against the government of the day, is a cornerstone of a healthy, modern democracy and a crucial way in which the public can legitimately hold those in power to account.  Cracking down on legitimate, non-violent protest is a deeply concerning tactic most usually utilised by authoritarian regimes.

It is absolutely unacceptable that Part 4 of the Act threatens to criminalise the traditional way of life of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) communities. It introduces a new criminal offence where trespassers reside or have the intent to reside. As noted by Friends, Families and Travellers, failure to comply can lead to the police exercising powers to seize a vehicle (someone’s home and possessions) as well as imprisonment and a fine. GRT communities already face disproportionate violations of their rights, with life expectancies between 10 and 25 years shorter than the general population and children from these communities experiencing the lowest academic attainment of all ethnic groups throughout their school years.[1] To further marginalise the rights of communities already experiencing such clear and disproportionate violations is morally reprehensible and we will not accept it.

As highlighted by the Police Bill Alliance (an informal coalition of 350+ UK organisations that opposed the bill’s assault on freedom, rights and marginalised communities), the Act seeks to criminalise rather than realise rights:

“The Bill will [] criminalise Gypsy, Traveller and nomadic families who have no place to stop and rest. The chronic lack of safe stopping places means the Government has ultimately chosen punishment over provision. It’s cruel to use the full strength of the law to tell people where they can’t go but offer nowhere they can go.”

[1] For further reading about the myriad of disproportionate human rights violations GRT communities already face in the UK, check out the Shadow Report to the Universal Periodic Review Working Group and UN Member States: Focus Report on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller Communities March 2022.

The Elections Act has now passed. This will require all voters in Great Britain to show ID at polling stations,[1] a move which Liberty has noted will make it much harder for millions of people to vote in elections, particularly those from already marginalised groups. In the context of the above reforms, this represents another attack on those who are already marginalised by our society and another way for the UK Government to avoid being held to account – this time by the electorate at election time.

The right to vote is guaranteed by Article 3, Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the UK Government should be doing everything it can to help people exercise this right, rather than making it more difficult.

The Act will also impact the Electoral Commission, an independent agency which oversees elections in the UK, by giving the Executive rather than Parliament a greater say in the work of the Commission. Again, in the overall context of other reforms, this shift of power represents a potentially worrying direction for effective and independent scrutiny.

[1] Voters in Northern Ireland are already required by law to show photographic ID in order to vote.

The Judicial Review and Courts Bill has now passed. Judicial Review is a key mechanism whereby people can hold public authorities and the UK Government to account when they act unlawfully. While the UK Government made some important concessions in order to pass Bill, the Public Law Project has highlighted concerns:

“Clause 2 of the Bill [] ‘ousts’ Cart judicial reviews which are used mostly in immigration and social security cases to overturn serious errors of law made by tribunals. Cart judicial reviews have prevented deportations to authoritarian regimes where people risked torture and death, and brought justice to very vulnerable people who were unlawfully denied their benefits.”

Again, we see the UK Government avoiding scrutiny and targeting those most marginalised by our society.

The Queen’s Speech included the UK Government’s intention to replace the Human Rights Act with a ‘bill of rights’. We have already written at length about our opposition to the proposed reform of the Human Rights Act and our misgivings about the intentions behind this scheme. We do not believe the Executive is acting in good faith to strengthen our rights, but rather that they are seeking to undermine both our fundamental rights, and the ways in which we can hold those in power to account when they violate our rights.

In addition, the Executive is seeking to conduct this ‘overhaul’ through consultation documents which are so limited in scope and legally technical that they act as an effective barrier to participation to all but the most particularly legally trained. Conversations about our fundamental rights should not take place without all people in the UK having a chance to consider the issues and have their voices heard.

The reform also seeks to run roughshod over the clearly expressed views and the very different trajectories of the devolved jurisdictions across the UK. Again, it is difficult to see this proposed reform as anything other than an attack on the rights of the people, and a further attempt to evade scrutiny by the UK Government.