The enactment of the UK’s human right act elicited assorted reactions both from the public and even among the civil service in addition to the reactions from the least expected the European fraternity. Some perceive it to be the precise way of meeting the core human right cases and consideration while others take it as a major impediment in the implementation of the common law drawing much attention on the national security. The bottom line lays the question on what really these changes came with and how it is projected to change the lives of UK citizens and the wider European community. Additionally, the application of legal laws as well as civil liberties draws attention for analysis in regard to the human rights acts pertaining the general public as well as the civil servants and even the visitors from foreign nations who are bound to be protected by the same laws. This study analyses some of the imminent changes to be anticipated by the human rights act on citizens, government, and the European community among other many parties involved.
To begin with is a look at how the changes have been manifested by the human rights act as it concerns the UK citizens and their protection. Distinctly, the Human Rights Act brought about momentous but quite valuable impacts upon the central government’s ability to develop and formulate policies. In this regard, the prospected changes are that the government can formulate laws in three ways. First is the formalization process which ensures that the convention rights are conversant with the act entailing the fact that all subsequent Bills intended for approval in the parliament are scrutinized jointly by the Parliamentary committee regarding Human Rights. Through the litigation process, the delivery of the policies is determined by the specifications of the act. The third way is facilitated through behaviuoral change that allows for all public authority to act in a way compatible to the conventional rights.
Another outstanding impact of the enactment befalls the UK law. It is argued that the subsequent decisions made by the law courts in the country have had minimal impact especially in the fight against crime. This in essence questions the government’s ability to brawl crime since the enactment. Such changes are bound to undermine the efficiency of the government operations dreading breaking the Human rights Act stipulations. However, the act has been somewhat beneficial as far as the UK law is concerned. For instance, dialogue has been apt since the onset of the act amid the UK judges and their counterparts at the European court of Human rights. It is further evident that then act has not predominantly altered the constitutional balance that exists between the three major arms of government. To exemplify such changes, two profound cases come in handy.