On a Sunday which began with the Prime Minister muting possible withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights on Marr’s sofa, thankfully there was much to cheer at Liberty’s Conservative Party conference Fringe yesterday. Tory activists packed the room in Manchester, and they weren’t disappointed - our panel guests did us proud as they tackled tricky issues ranging from torture to Internet snooping. But the evening ultimately belonged to Attorney General Dominic Grieve, who delivered a memorable and rousing reminder of the importance of fundamental rights and freedoms to huge applause.
“I feel more comfortable living in a state where, from time to time, I go in and want to bang my head against the wall with frustration at what I see as a silly decision by judges in an individual case than to live in a society where there’s no ability to enforce rights,” the Attorney General told the audience. “As society gets more complex, as the power of the state intrudes more and more, rights protection actually does make sense… That’s why (our forbearers) had the Bill of Rights of 1689. That’s why they had the Magna Carta, because it added to the common law rights they already had and which were insufficient for them to protect them. There’s a long history in this – there’s not something unusual about having human rights in this country.”
Mr Grieve also suggested that leaving the European Convention could cause the entire system to collapse – easing the pressure on countries with poor human rights records to improve. “If we leave it then we have to take the international reputational consequences of doing so,” he said. And he stressed that people would always be angered by some court decisions – such is the nature of judicial interpretation. “That will happen whether or not we are members of the Convention or whether we have got our own Supreme Court looking at the same thing,” he added.
And on the question of Abu Qatada he was clear: "It was a win-win, there's no doubt about it. We both adhered to European Convention norms and improved another country outside of the Convention's norms of behaviour as well. It is a remarkable success and great credit to Home Secretary Theresa May for her perseverance in carrying it through."
Earlier the panel were quizzed on access to justice in this country and the activities of the intelligence services. Peter Oborne, The Daily Telegraph’s chief political commentator, reminded the audience of the stain on our reputation following revelations of kidnap and torture and the flagrant abuses of our US ally. He talked movingly of his visit to meet Mr Belhadj, the Libyan man allegedly rendered to Gaddafi’s Libya with the help of the UK authorities to face medieval-style torture alongside his wife in Abu Salim prison.
There was also a question from Freedom From Torture’s Keith Best on whether the resumed detainee inquiry would prove robust. The Attorney expressed regret that the original Gibson Inquiry was halted but emphasised that criminal prosecutions must run their course first. He attempted to reassure the audience that where serious breaches have occurred, they will be investigated and prosecuted. Peter Oborne, meanwhile, pointed out that a British resident is still languishing in Guantanamo Bay – while labelling the Gibson Inquiry a “completely unsuitable” attempt at investigating such grave allegations. Elsewhere, in response to a question about female genital mutilation in Britain, the Attorney General stressed that violence against women is a chief priority for the CPS – but admitted that it is a “difficult crime to prosecute”.
With the arrival of our final panel guest, journalist Amanda Platell, came final questions on Internet metadata and, of course, the future of human rights protection in the UK. On online snooping, Amanda was unequivocal – she’d be “appalled” if the intelligence services were spying on who she communicates with. “It’s just wrong,” she told the audience and warned that blanket surveillance threatened press freedom. But she said the public debate on human rights was being lost. British people believe they support such values but have “lost confidence in the system”, she argued.
Amanda’s bleak assessment seemed to inspire the Attorney General, who brought proceedings to a close with a stirring defence of human rights principles. “I defy anyone in this room to read the European Convention and find a right within it with which they disagree,” he declared. “That’s not to say we always get it right – we’re a human society, there will always be examples of judicial decisions which are probably wrong.
“But the question is how do we tackle this problem in a way which leads to a satisfactory long-term outcome for this country. That’s what I’m committed to try to help my colleagues achieve.”
