The United Kingdom and Human Rights - College of Social ...

Human Rights Talk 73
review was logically entailed by the Constitution drafted
in 1787, a view foreshadowed by Coke in Bonham's Case.
The most recent development has been use of the term
"absolute." It refers to the notion that fundamental
rights are always binding in all circumstances whatsoever.
Modern international human rights Conventions
have adopted this notion (subject to certain loopholes to
which I shall refer in connection with the European
Convention on Human Rights). Such Conventions can in
consequence cause problems for Governments. Again,
some state constitutions have contained absolute fundamental
rights in respect of property. In India, these
provisions blocked land reform schemes, resulting in a
state of emergency after disputes between Mrs. Ghandi's
Government and the judiciary, which had upheld the
constitutional property protections. Restrictions of that
kind can have other adverse consequences, for example,
effective town planning legislation will be blocked if full
compensation is required should development rights be
denied. United Kingdom opponents of incorporating the
European Convention on Human Rights into domestic
law have asserted that this entails similar risks. However,
Article 1 of the First Protocol does not impair "the
right of the state to enforce such laws as it deems
necessary to control the use of property in accordance
with the general interest," and persons can be deprived
of their possessions in the public interest, subject to
conditions provided by law and by the general principles
of International Law.
Another type of rhetorical reference to human rights
places no legal barriers to legislative and governmental
action—although it psychologically constrains those in
office. It consists of the assertion of rights in a formal
declaration, either by a Constituent Assembly of people's
delegates or by a legislature. The first such assertions
were in the constitutions of the rebelling British