MERRIS AMOS
Queen Mary, University of London

When the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) came into force on 2 October 2000 it enjoyed very little specialised institutional support. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), with its human rights remit, did not come into existence until 1 October 2007 and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights in January 2001. What limited support there was came from government, NGOs, individual claimants and their lawyers, some judges and an almost universally hostile media. Consequently, when the HRA faced its first real test, following the attack on the World Trade Centre on September 11, 2001, it was very clear that it had not taken root in the hearts and minds of the general public, politicians or other public figures. The leader of the Conservative Party at the time claimed that the HRA was an obstacle to protecting the lives of British citizens and the next leader, David Cameron, frequently called for its repeal.

More than ten years on, the position in which the HRA now finds itself, maligned by the media and the subject of a Bill of Rights Commission to determine its future, demonstrates the importance of early, and comprehensive, institutional support to the success, or otherwise, of legal measures to protect human rights. Whilst the full complement of institutional support is now in place, including the EHRC, it is clear that the HRA has not overcome early difficulties. There is no shortage of litigation, but there is still limited knowledge of the HRA amongst the general public and public authorities, and a climate of disrespect surrounds it. Taking into account the roles already performed by other institutional actors, the EHRC is uniquely well placed to reverse this trend via education, training and promotion and carefully chosen HRA test cases.