Judiciary and Constitution

Judiciary and Constitution

Introduction

There are, strictly speaking, fundamental rights in the British constitutional system. The United Kingdom has no constitution rigid rules. The unwritten constitution of the United Kingdom, for its own idiosyncrasies, does not include guarantees Constitutionalism classic post-World War II gave the fundamental rights such as the existence of mechanisms for constitutional reform aggravated or guarantees the predictability of content essential. The British management does exist, and this has been one of its distinctive range-created constitutional rights case law ("Common Law Rights'), such as personal freedom, access to justice or not submitting to taxes not established by law. The catalog of these rights, which may be repealed before the language "clear" of a law, is typical of a liberal society, where it is understood that the concept of freedom implies the possibility of doing everything that the law does not prohibit. The "Human Rights Act" (or HRA) in 1998, is the British Parliament Act aims "to give effect weitere" in the United Kingdom to the European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter ECHR), adopted by the Council of Europe in 1950. The ECHR was only standard on the British constitutional order proclaiming a declaration of fundamental rights for its citizens. For many years, it was understood by the English doctrine that this statement was not necessary in the UK, that the rights of its population and were covered by the British legal system (through the "freedom" that the laws guaranteed Westminster, formal equality before the law that the "rule of law" preached and the catalog of rights, typical of a liberal society, emerged from the evolution of the "common law").

It was not acceptable for the citizens of this State had to go, having exhausted domestic remedies, the ECtHR, with the costs-financial and time that was involved, to defend their fundamental rights and that these rights also were not integrated in the jurisprudence of its courts and domestic courts. In this sense, there were many ECHR rights that were contained in the "common law" British (for example, the right to privacy or intimacy). Nearly 50 years later, a British Act of Parliament in the UK transposed a Bill of Rights of 1950, which are missing, in turn, the rights of citizenship of art, as well as measures to fight for a society in which reigns a real and effective equality. The HRA makes the ECHR in binding law to the State Public Authorities, although with a more interpretive than "real" courts cannot dis-apply a national rule in contrast to the HRA. The "High Courts" Britain must comply, as far as possible, the jurisprudence of the ECtHR. When a statutory provision, expressly and clearly forced to act in a manner contrary to the HRA, not leaving any room for maneuver, these courts will have to declare the incompatibility of the standard (not derogate from or disability), that Parliament may be amended to overcome this conflict. This is the solution that has been found to save both the HRA and the supremacy ...