Making it work together

Protecting our Rights

A Human Rights Commission for Scotland?Consultation Document

1

Foreword

by Deputy First Minister and M

inister for Justice

Foreword by Deputy First Minister and Minister for Justice

The Scottish Executive is firmly committed to the establishment of a genuine human rights culture in Scotland. Respect for ourobligations in the area of human rights is an integral part of thedevolution settlement; and the Scotland Act and the Human RightsAct have made a real difference in bringing individual rights backhome, where they belong.

The idea that we might improve protection of human rights inScotland by establishing an independent Human Rights Commissionwas first raised in the Scottish Parliament last year; and I announced in June that the Executive would launch a public debate on the issuesinvolved by means of a consultation document. That commitmentwas reflected in “Working Together for Scotland”, our programme forGovernment. I am pleased today to publish this document whichseeks to set out some of the main issues briefly and to invite responsesfrom interested organisations and citizens.

We are keen to have an open and inclusive discussion on the issues,and want to hear your views before we decide how to proceed.We look forward to hearing from you.

Jim Wallace MSP

PROTECTING OUR RIGHTS: A HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION FOR SCOTLAND? CONSULTATION DOCUMENT

2

Pro

tect

ing o

ur

Rig

hts

A H

uman

Rig

hts

Com

mis

sion

for

Sco

tlan

d?

The European Convention of Human Rights and

the Human Rights Act 1998

1. The Council of Europe agreed the European Convention onHuman Rights (ECHR) in 1950. The ECHR sets out 16fundamental rights and freedoms to be enjoyed by all. Its contents aresummarised at Annex 1.The United Kingdom was one of the mainforces behind the Convention, and was the first country to ratify it.Since 1966, British citizens have been able to bring cases to theEuropean Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. However untilOctober 2000 Convention Rights could only be enforced by going toStrasbourg (except for the limited circumstances in which, since May1999, the Scotland Act 1998 had allowed Convention rights to beenforced in the domestic courts) and this could only be done afterexhausting all possible legal remedies in the UK judicial system; theprocess of doing so was usually lengthy, complex and expensive.

2. The Human Rights Act 1998, which took effect on 2 Octoberlast year, changed all that. The Act is outlined at Annex 2. UK citizenscan now enforce their Convention rights in British courts: and allpublic authorities are bound to comply with the ECHR as a matter of domestic law. The definition of public authorities is a wide one,covering central and local government, the police, the courts, and anyperson or organisation carrying out functions of a public nature.

3. This brings an end to a long, complicated and costly process; andembeds respect for individual rights and freedoms at the heart of ourpublic life.

Human rights and the devolution settlement

4. However, even before the Human Rights Act entered into force,human rights were woven into the fabric of the devolution settlement.Under the Scotland Act, the Scottish Parliament and Executive arebound to comply with the ECHR. The relevant provisions are set out at Annex 3. If they do not so comply, and if a Scottish courtupholds a challenge, actions of the Scottish Ministers and Acts of theScottish Parliament can be struck down as unlawful.

5. The Scottish Executive takes this obligation extremely seriously,and has carried out a thorough audit of its activities against therequirements of the Convention. Where we have identified weaknesses,we have taken action to put them right: this has resulted in the passingof the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Scotland) Act 2000 and theBail and Judicial Appointments etc (Scotland) Act 2000 which addressa number of issues affecting policing and the functioning of the justicesystem. We are currently proposing further action in the ConventionRights (Compliance) (Scotland) Bill before the Scottish Parliament.

INTRODUCTION: HUMAN RIGHTS IN SCOTLAND

3

This Bill includes a provision for Ministers to remedy legislationwhich is incompatible with the ECHR, using a fast-track proceduresubject to the approval of Parliament.1

Why a new body?

6. Arguments have been advanced that proposals for legislationrequire more scrutiny in relation to their implications for humanrights. The existing pre-enactment scrutiny procedures are designedto ensure, among other things, that the Bill does not containprovisions that are incompatible with the ECHR.2 All Executive Billsare thoroughly scrutinised before introduction by the Scottish LawOfficers and others within the Scottish Executive to check for ECHRcompliance. Nevertheless, it is argued by some people that the pre-enactment scrutiny outside the Executive does not focus on humanrights issues specifically and that the fact that the scrutiny covers allaspects of legislative competence means that insufficient attention ispaid to human rights aspects.

7. It is also argued that in addition to scrutiny of legislation, thereneeds to be more guidance provided to public authorities and to thepublic in general on human rights and responsibilities; and that asustained awareness-raising campaign is necessary. Both the HomeOffice and the Scottish Executive have published and widelydistributed basic guidance material: but there is no single organisationin the UK charged with such a publicity function. Some peopleargue that a Human Rights Commission is therefore needed tocomplement the Human Rights Act and improve its effectiveness.

8. On the other hand, it should be borne in mind that Conventioncase law shows that the European Court of Human Rights recognisesthe importance of the doctrine of “margin of appreciation”. Themargin of appreciation means that is up to individual states to decidein certain areas what is legitimate or not, therefore, the EuropeanCourt of Human Rights will not interfere with such policy decisionsof the National State/Parliament.

9. The Scottish Parliament, therefore, has to ensure that legislationpassed is within its competence. However in areas covered by theConvention, there are still many important decisions of a policy nature,which are left to the discretion of the Parliament. It needs to beconsidered how a Human Rights Commission would contribute to thecurrent process.

1 Section 10 of the Human Rights Act already gives both Scottish and UK Ministers the power to remedy legislation if it has been declared incompatible with the ECHR. However, UKMinisters also have more general powers under section 107 of the Scotland Act to take remedial action where provisions of an Act of the Scottish Parliament may be incompatible withthe Convention, or where there is doubt as to the compatibility of actions taken by the Scottish ministers. The Convention Rights (Compliance) (Scotland) Bill proposes the conferringof similar wide powers on the Scottish Ministers.

2 The legislative process involves a number of safeguards. Legal advice is provided to Ministers about whether proposed legislation falls within legislative competence, including respectingthe ECHR.The Executive must present a formal statement that it does so when a Bill is introduced by it (section 31(1) of the Scotland Act).The Presiding Officer must also give his viewon whether any Bill is compatible with the Convention rights (section 31(2)). During the four-week period between the passing of a Bill in the Scottish Parliament and receiving RoyalAssent, Scottish and UK Law Officers may refer the proposed legislation to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to give a definitive ruling (section 33). Any Act of the ScottishParliament has to be compatible with the Convention rights – section 29(2)(d) of the Scotland Act, (see Annex 3 for details).

A1. In your opinion, does Scotland need a Human Rights Commission?

A2. Why?

Protectin

g ou

r Rig

hts

A H

uman R

ights Com

mission for S

cotland?

4

Pro

tect

ing o

ur

Rig

hts

A H

uman

Rig

hts

Com

mis

sion

for

Sco

tlan

d?

A specifically Scottish Human Rights Commission?

10. The idea of a UK-wide Human Rights Commission has been putforward, although UK Ministers have made clear that they are not yetconvinced of the need for one. However, some have argued thatScotland needs its own body. They do so on the basis that Scotlandhas its own Parliament and Executive with specific powers to legislateon issues with major human rights implications: this means, theysuggest, that the Parliament and Executive need specialist advicetailored to the specific circumstances. The argument is also advancedby some that a specifically Scottish body is justified on democraticgrounds against the background of devolution. They also point to thefact that Scotland has a separate criminal justice, court and penalsystem. And they argue that only a specifically Scottish body couldunderstand and respond to concerns raised in the Scottish context.3

This body would have the requisite knowledge of the way in whichpublic administration takes place in Scotland. Supporters of nationalHuman Rights Commission argue that human rights are best enforcedand monitored in a regional context.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

11. The Good Friday Agreement called for the establishment ofHuman Rights Commissions in Northern Ireland and the Republicof Ireland. The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission(NIHRC) was formed in 1999. A brief sketch of its remit and that ofother Commissions elsewhere is given at Annex 4.

Examples from elsewhere

12. A number of countries bound by the ECHR have establishednational institutions dedicated to human rights.4 In addition othercountries with common law traditions such as Australia, Canada, NewZealand and United States have similar institutions. Very brief outlinesare given at Annex 4.

3 The Privy Council is the final court for devolution issues and can deal with alleged contravention of the ECHR in that context. The Privy Council is of course not a specifically Scottishbody but it does deal effectively with ECHR arguments where they arise in a Scottish legal context.

4 These include Germany, Denmark, France, Netherlands, and Northern Ireland.

B1. Do you think that there is a need for closer scrutiny oflegislation, more guidance to public authorities or the public, ora specific awareness-raising campaign on human rights issues?

B2. If so, does this justify the creation of a new body, or could theseissues be addressed in other ways?

B3. How?

C. Do you consider that there is a strong case for a specificallyScottish body?

5

Protectin

g ou

r Rig

hts

A H

uman R

ights Com

mission for S

cotland?

13. These bodies have remits with wide ranging obligations to humanrights issues. However, we have to consider the limitations of drawingon models in other countries. The remit and function of a nationalHuman Rights Commission will reflect the political, cultural,constitutional and legal traditions of the country in question. Somefunctions of overseas Human Rights Commission include:

■ Statutory body status

■ Raising the awareness of human rights issues

■ Receiving complaints about and conducting investigations intoviolations of human rights

■ Seeking to ensure that the country complies with its internationalobligations on human rights

■ Conducting research into human rights

■ Developing policy proposals on human rights

The Paris Principles

14. In 1991 the United Nations agreed a resolution including a set of principles relating to the status of national institutions protectingand promoting human rights known as the Paris principles. They areset out at Annex 5. It calls member countries to establish nationalinstitutions, and recommends that national institutions or HumanRights Commissions be independent of government; representative of various elements in civil society; and adequately resourced. Theseguidelines suggest a broad mandate but emphasise that it is the rightand responsibility of each country to choose the framework bestsuited to its own needs and circumstances.

15. It has been argued that the incorporation of the Convention rightsby way of the Human Rights Act is sufficient since we now have themeans to redress issues through our domestic courts and it may,therefore, be unnecessary to establish a Human Rights Commission.

Role of a new body

16. The Paris principles suggest a number of roles for nationalinstitutions looking at human rights. Drawing from these guidelines,examples of existing Human Rights Commissions and arguments putforward by supporters of a specifically Scottish body, there are anumber of complementary roles, which a new body might perform:

■ To scrutinise for ECHR compliance proposals for legislation inthe Scottish Parliament, and perhaps UK legislation, which mightimpact on human rights in Scotland, and to advise the Executiveand/or Parliament

■ To monitor implementation of legislation and compliance bypublic authorities

6

Pro

tect

ing o

ur

Rig

hts

A H

uman

Rig

hts

Com

mis

sion

for

Sco

tlan

d?

■ To provide guidance to public authorities on how to ensurecompliance and effective protection of human rights

■ To promote awareness of human rights issues, rights andresponsibilities throughout Scotland

■ To investigate and report on possible cases of abuse5

■ To assist individuals to take legal action in cases where rights mayhave been breached 6

Status of a new body

17. The status of a new Scottish body would depend largely on the functions it was to perform. A non-statutory body could beestablished quickly and easily and there is no reason why a bodywhose function was primarily one of awareness-raising and guidancewould need a statutory basis: but if a new body was charged withproviding formal advice to the Executive or Parliament, or withinvestigating possible abuses, giving it a statutory basis might be seenas more desirable in terms both of powers (e.g. to call witnesses orobtain documents), funding and of accountability. Most internationalexamples are statutory but independent of governments.

Relationships with existing bodies

18. There are currently a number of UK statutory bodies active inScotland dealing with rights and equality issues, including:

■ the Commission for Racial Equality

■ the Equal Opportunities Commission

■ the Disability Rights Commission

■ the Information Commissioner (who has functions relating toboth Freedom of Information and Data Protection)

D. If you support the creation of a new body for Scotland, what roleor roles do you think it should have?

E. Which of these is likely to be the most effective, in your view?

F. Are all of the functions mentioned above complementary, or aresome of them mutually incompatible?

5 This raises the issue of to whom a new body would report and whether it would be able to recommend or impose sanctions in the event of abuse (see section on accountability).

6 It should be noted however that, if it was proposed to give a new body the function of actually bringing proceedings (whether or not “on behalf of” the victim, careful considerationwould have to be given to whether this would entail modifying the Human Rights Act and the Scotland Act (something which Schedule 4 to the latter Act prevents being done withinlegislative competence).

G. If a new body were to be created, do you think it would require a statutory basis?

7

19. All of these deal to some extent with issues relevant to theECHR: but supporters of a new human rights commission forScotland argue that there are still gaps in coverage which make aspecific body desirable. The work of these bodies is in specific areasand does not cover wider Human Rights issues. The Commission for Racial Equality and the Equal Opportunities Commission haveindicated their support for this view. If a new body were established,however, it would be necessary to ensure clarity and coherencebetween it and the existing organisations as to their respective rolesand responsibilities. Since the latter are UK bodies, because anti-discrimination policy is a matter reserved to the UK government,this would require discussion with the UK government.

Accountability

20. If a new body were created, it would be necessary to establishformal lines of accountability. This would of course depend in part onits role in providing advice to the Executive or Parliament. Proponentshave suggested that in order to preserve independence fromgovernment, it should answer to the Scottish Parliament. Statutoryequality bodies, such as Commission for Racial Equality, EqualOpportunities Commission and Disability Rights Commission areindependent bodies but report to the UK Parliament. The otheralternative is that it should report to the Scottish Executive.

21. However, in the context of the Commission having a possible role in scrutinising legislation and against the background of devolutionissues, it can be argued that it does not make sense for a new body to answer to the Scottish Executive.

H. What in your view should be the relationship between a newbody and existing UK statutory bodies?

I1. Would creating a new body require a re-examination of theremits of any existing organisations?

I2. In what sense?

J. To whom, in your view, should a new body be formallyaccountable?

Protectin

g ou

r Rig

hts

A H

uman R

ights Com

mission for S

cotland?

8

Pro

tect

ing o

ur

Rig

hts

A H

uman

Rig

hts

Com

mis

sion

for

Sco

tlan

d?

Membership

22. The Paris principles propose that members of human rightscommissions should be representative of society as a whole, and thatthere should be appointment procedures designed to ensure this.Supporters of a commission for Scotland have put forward threeoptions:

■ Creation of a Human Rights Committee in the Parliamentresponsible for appointments;

■ Giving the task to the Convenor’s Committee;

■ Establishing a small group of MSPs with party political balance torecommend appointments to the Parliament.

Resources

23. Resources, both human and financial, would depend on thefunctions and accountability of a new body. One issue is whether anew body should have a permanent secretariat or research staff, orshould simply be able to call on assistance from the Parliament, theExecutive or elsewhere as necessary. Another is whether it shouldhave a single headquarters or, as some have suggested, branch officesacross the country. It is not possible to develop a specific model untilthe broader issues have been resolved: but whatever model wasultimately adopted, it would require public funding, either through the Parliament or through the Executive. In this regard, the Parisprinciples propose that the budget of a human rights commissionshould be separate from government. It would also need to complywith the standards of transparency and financial accountabilityrequired of other public bodies.

N. What in principle, do you think the structure of any new bodyshould be?

K. How, in your view, should appointments be made, and by whom?

L. How many members should a new body have?

M. Is it essential that members of a human rights commission shouldhave specific expertise in the field, or is it more important thatthey should be representative of different groups in Scottishsociety?

9

Resp

onses

24. You are invited to respond in writing to the above questions, andto make any other points you consider relevant in this context, to

Protecting our RightsA Human Rights Commission for Scotland? Consultation DocumentAccess to Justice, Diligence and European Co-ordination DivisionScottish Executive Justice DepartmentR1/3 SpurSaughton HouseBroomhouse DriveEdinburghEH11 3XD

Fax (0131) 244 8325E-mail – humanrights@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

By 30th June 2001

For further information or if you would like this document in anotherformat or another language please contact Angela Jack. We will tryand accommodate your needs.

Tel – (0131) 244 2845Email – Angela.Jack@scotland.gsi.gov.ukOr consult website http://www.scotland.gov.uk

Copies of responses received will, as is normal practice, be madeavailable to others, on request, unless respondents indicate that all or part of their response is confidential. In the latter case, theconfidentiality will be strictly respected.

Scottish Executive Justice DepartmentMarch 2001

RESPONSES

10

Annex

1

Annex 1

Convention Rights

■ The right to life (Article 2)

■ Freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment (Article 3)

■ Freedom from slavery, servitude or forced or compulsory labour(Article 4)

■ The right to liberty and security of person (Article 5)

■ The right to a fair and public trial within a reasonable time(Article 6)

■ Freedom from retrospective criminal penalties and no punishmentwithout law (Article 7)

■ The right to respect for private and family life, for home and forcorrespondence (Article 8)

■ Freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 9)

■ Freedom of expression (Article 10)

■ Freedom of assembly and association (Article 11)

■ The right to marry and found a family (Article 12)

■ Prohibition of discrimination in the enjoyment of Conventionrights (Article 14)

■ The right to peaceful enjoyment of one’s possessions (Article 1,Protocol 1)

■ The right to education (Article 2, Protocol 1)

■ The right to free elections (Article 3, Protocol 1)

■ The right not to be subjected to the death penalty (Protocol 6)

The convention rights can be framed into two broad categories:absolute and qualified

Absolute rights are those rights which under no circumstances canbe infringed in the interest of the state. These rights include the rightto protection from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment andpunishment (Article 3), the prohibition on slavery and enforced labour(Article 4), and the protection from retrospective criminal penalties(Article 7).

Qualified rights are those rights which are subject to limitations andexceptions, they include the right the right to liberty (Article 5), theright to respect for private and family life (Article 8), the right to

ANNEX

11

Annex 1

freedom of expression (Article 10), religion (article 9), assembly andassociation (Article 11), the right to the peaceful enjoyment ofproperty (Protocol 1,Article 1) and to some extent the right toeducation (Protocol 1,Article 2). Interference with these rights ispermissible only if what is done:

■ is specifically authorised by the law;

■ pursues a legitimate aim of social policy. The sorts of aims whichare legitimate are the interests of public safety, national security, theprotection of health and morals and the economic well-being ofthe country and the protection of rights and freedoms of others;

■ is necessary in a democratic society. This means that theinterference must be compliant with the “principle ofproportionality” and, therefore, any restriction of the Conventionrights must be proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued;

This formulation of rights is designed to create a fair balance betweenthe rights of the individual and society.

12

Annex

2

Annex 2

Summary of Human Rights Act 1998

Below are some of the main provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Section 1: specifies which of the Convention rights are covered bythe Human Rights Act

Section 2: requires courts or tribunals determining questions whichhave arisen in connection with the Convention rights totake into account the decisions of Strasbourg (theEuropean Court and Commission of Human Rights andthe Committee of Ministers) so far as is relevant.

Section 3: requires legislation to be interpreted as far as possible in away which is compatible with the Convention rights.

Section 4: allows the higher courts to make a ‘declaration ofincompatibility’ where they find that primary legislation isincompatible with a Convention right. The continuingvalidity and enforcement of the legislation is not affectedby such a declaration.

Section 5: states that when a court is considering making adeclaration of incompatibility, the Crown is entitled tonotice and to be joined as party to the proceedings. Thiswill enable a Minister to present any arguments he thinksfit and to provide the court with information, which maybe relevant to the issue in question.

Section 6: defines a public authority and makes it unlawful for apublic authority to act in a way which is incompatiblewith a Convention right unless it is required to do so byprimary legislation or inevitably incompatible secondarylegislation.

Section 7: victims may rely on the Convention rights in legalproceedings in UK courts and tribunals or instituteseparate proceedings. Separate proceedings must bebrought within one year (or less) of the date on whichthe act complained of took place or after a longer periodif the court or tribunal judges that to be fair under thecircumstances.

Section 8: the court may grant such relief as it considers just andappropriate, provided that it otherwise has power to do so.

Section 9: concerns methods of challenging acts of courts andtribunals on the basis that they are incompatible with aConvention right.

13

Annex 2

Section 10: the relevant Minister may by order amend incompatiblelegislation following a declaration of incompatibility or afinding of the European Court of Human Rights if he issatisfied that there is a compelling reason to do so.

Section 11: makes it clear that the Act does not restrict any existingrights that an individual might have under UK law or hisright to bring proceedings under existing law.

Section 12: contains safeguards in respect of court or tribunal orderswhich might affect the right to freedom of expression.

Section 13: obliges a court to have particular regard to theimportance of the right to freedom of thought,conscience and religion where a decision made by itmight affect the exercise of that right by a religiousorganisation or its members.

Section 19: requires that when legislation is introduced into eitherHouse of the Westminster Parliament and before secondreading, the Minister responsible must make a writtenstatement that he considers the Bill is compatible withthe Convention rights or that he is unable to make astatement of compatibility but wishes Parliament toproceed with the Bill anyway.

Section 21: interpretation section, in particular providing themeaning of primary and subordinate legislation.

Section 22: ensures that victims can rely on their Convention rightsin proceedings brought by a public authority, even if theact in question took place before section 7 came intoforce.

14

Annex

3

Annex 3

Scotland Act 1998 – Sections 29 and 57(2)

Section 29 – Legislative Competence

(1) An Act of the Scottish Parliament is not law so far as anyprovision of the Act is outside the legislative competence of theParliament.

(2) A provision is outside that competence so far as any of thefollowing paragraphs apply

(a) it would form part of the law of a country or territoryother than Scotland, or confer or remove functionsexercisable otherwise than in or as regards Scotland,

(b) it relates to reserved matters,

(c) it is in breach of the restrictions in Schedule 4,

(d) it is incompatible with any of the Convention rights or withCommunity law,

(e) it would remove the Lord Advocate from his position ashead of the systems of criminal prosecution andinvestigation of deaths in Scotland.

(3) For the purposes of this section, the question whether aprovision of an Act of the Scottish Parliament relates to areserved matter is to be determined, subject to subsection (4),by reference to the purpose of the provision, having regard(among other things) to its effect in all the circumstances.

(4) A provision which –

(a) would otherwise not relate to reserved matters, but

(b) makes modifications of Scots private law, or Scots criminallaw, as it applies to reserved matters, is to be treated asrelating to reserved matters unless the purpose of theprovision is to make the law in question apply consistentlyto reserved matters and otherwise.

Section 57(2) – Community Law and Convention Rights

57(2) A member of the Scottish Executive has no power to make anysubordinate legislation, or to do any other act, so far as thelegislation or act is incompatible with any of the Conventionrights or with Community law.

15

Annex 4

Annex 4

International Human Rights Commissions

Australia

Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission establishedin 1986

Statutory Body

Key Functions

• Public Awareness and Education

• Policy and legislative development

• Human rights compliance

• Anti-discrimination and human rights complaints

Responsibility to observe seven international instrumentsratified by Australia.

Administers the federal legislation on human rights.

Canada

Human Rights Commission established in 1978

Statutory Body

Key Functions

• Promotes knowledge of human rights and encourage peopleto follow principles of equality

• Provides effective and timely means for resolving individualcomplaints

• Reduces barriers to equality in employment and access toservices

Does not ensure Canada’s compliance with international actsjust the provisions in the Canadian Human Rights Act 1977.

Denmark

Danish Centre for Human Rights established in 1987

Statutory Body

ECHR incorporated into Danish domestic law

Key Functions

• Advice to public

• Conducts research work

16

Annex

4

France

Commission Nationale Consultative des droits de l’Hommeestablished in 1947

Statutory Body

ECHR incorporated into French domestic law

Key Functions

• Conducts studies and makes recommendations forGovernment

• Advises Government on promotion and protection of humanrights

• Ratification of international instruments on human rights

Germany

Federal Constitutional Court established in the 1950s

Statutory Body

ECHR incorporated into German Domestic law

Netherlands

Institute of Human Rights established in 1981

Statutory Body

ECHR incorporated into Dutch domestic law

Key Functions

• Research

• Promotes awareness of human rights in Netherlands bothhere and abroad

• Provides documentation on human rights

• Publishes reports on findings

New Zealand

Human Rights Commission established in 1977

Statutory Body

Key Functions

• Promotes by education and publicity, respect for andobservance of human rights

• Conciliates and/or investigates complaints of unlawfuldiscrimination

17

Annex 4

• Ensures compliance with International Standards andrecommends any appropriate legislative changes

• Advises desirability for New Zealand being bound byparticular international instruments

Northern Ireland

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission established in 1999

Statutory Body

Key Functions

• Promotes awareness and understanding of the importance of human rights

• Publishes or makes available research findings

• Reviews existing law and practice and to advise thegovernment on what steps are necessary for protection of rights

Work is carried out through committees.

Republic of Ireland

A condition of the Good Friday agreement is that the Irishgovernment establishes a Human Rights Commission. TheHuman Rights bill passed through the second house of the Dailin February 2000 but the Commission has yet to be formed.

United States

Does not have a federal Human Rights Commission. Howeverthe various states have a human rights ombudsman with varyingmandates.

18

Annex

5

Annex 5

Summary of The ‘Paris Principles’ – principles relating to the status ofNational Institutions

General Assembly Resolution 48/134, agreed in 1991

These cover four main areas

A. Competence and responsibilitiesB. Composition and guarantees of independence

and pluralismC. Methods of OperationD. Additional Principles concerning the status

of commissions with quasi-jurisdictionalcompetence

Brief description of main areas

A. Competence and responsibilities

1. A national institution shall protect and promote human rights.

2. A national institution shall be given as broad a mandate as possible.

3. A national institution shall, have the following responsibilities:

To advise government, parliament or other bodies on HumanRights public opinions and relate to legal, administrative andjudicial organisations to protect Human Rights.

(ii) Any situation of violation of human rights

(iii) Reports on the national situation on human rights

(iv) Drawing the government’s attention to Human Rightsviolations and making proposals on the positions andreactions of the governments;

b) To ensure compliance with International HumanRights instruments.

c) To encourage ratification of the Internationalinstruments.

d) To contribute to the reports for the United Nations ontheir State’s position on Human Rights issues.

e) To co-operate with the United Nations in the areas ofthe protection and promotion of human rights.

f) Teaching and research into human rights in schools anduniversities.

g) Increase public awareness of Human Rights throughinformation, education and the media.

19

Annex 5

B. Composition and guarantees of independence and pluralism

1. The plurality of society should be reflected in the membership ofthe organisation.

2. Have adequate funding to conduct activities and be independentof government.

3. The appointment of members should be in an official act toensure a stable mandate.

C. Methods of Operation

Within the framework of its operation, the national institution shall:

1. Consider any questions falling within its competence, whetherfrom government or a higher authority, on the proposal of itsmembers or of any petitioner.

2. Hear any person and obtain any information and any documentsnecessary for assessing situations.

3. Address public opinion directly to publicise its opinions andrecommendations.

4. Meet on a regular basis with all members.

5. Set up local or regional sections to assist in its functions.

6. Consult with other bodies responsible for the protection andpromotion of human rights.

7. Develop relations with non-governmental organisations devotedto protecting and promoting human rights.

D. Additional Principles concerning the status of commissionswith quasi-jurisdictional competence

A national institution may be authorised to hear and considercomplaints and petitions concerning individual situations. Individualsor any other representative organisations may bring cases before it.The functions entrusted to them may be based on the followingprinciples:

1. Seeking an amicable settlement within the limits prescribed bythe law.

2. Informing the party of the available remedies and promotingaccess to them.

3. Hearing any complaints or petitions.

4. Making recommendations to authorities, such as, law reform andamendments.

20

Annex

6

Annex 6

Summary of Questions

A1. In your opinion, does Scotland need a Human RightsCommission?

A2. Why?

B1. Do you think that there is a need for closer scrutiny oflegislation, more guidance to public authorities or the public, or aspecific awareness-raising campaign on human rights issues?

B2. If so, does this justify the creation of a new body, or could theseissues be addressed in other ways?

B3. How?

C. Do you consider that there is a strong case for a specificallyScottish body?

D. If you support the creation of a new body for Scotland, what roleor roles do you think it should have?

E. Which of these is likely to be the most effective in your view?

F. Are all of the functions mentioned above complementary, or aresome of them mutually incompatible?

G. If a new body were to be created, do you think it would require astatutory basis?

H. What, in your view, should be the relationship between a newbody and existing UK statutory bodies?

I1. Would creating a new body require a re-examination of the remitsof any existing organisations?

I2. In what sense?

J. To whom, in your view, should a new body be formallyaccountable?

K. How, in your view, should appointments be made, and by whom?

L. How many members should a new body have?

M. Is it essential that members of a human rights commission shouldhave specific expertise in the field, or is it more important thatthey should be representative of different groups in Scottishsociety?

N. What, in principle, do you think the structure of any new bodyshould be?