Attorney general: Human rights and the Human Rights Act are not the same thing

The crown's chief legal adviser has argued that replacing the embattled Human Rights Act with the government's British Bill of Rights will strengthen humanitarian protections.

Jeremy Wright QC, who replaced Dominic Grieve QC as the attorney general in 2014, has backed the Conservative manifesto promise to scrap Labour's 1998 Act.

The Lord Chancellor has already admitted that the Bill of Rights will be based on the European Convention on Human Rights and remain subject to the 'primacy of European law'.

The Bill will also maintain all the rights included in the 1998 legislation and contain only minor amendments, Michael Gove told MPs earlier this month.

Speaking in the House of Commons this week, Wright said: 'It is not the case that human rights and the Human Rights Act are the same thing.

'It is possible to protect human rights without the Human Rights Act, and in fact to do so better. That's what this government intends to do.'

The attorney general explained that he wanted to change the way rights were interpreted rather than get rid of any already included under the Human Rights Act.

In a recent exclusive interview, Wright told SJ that it was not the government's intention to leave the European Convention on Human Rights and that he had spent a great deal of time wrestling with the advice on the issue.

In another exclusive from January, former director of public prosecutions Keir Starmer MP said the Tories' plans need to be fought every inch of the way.

'The government will not come back with something better than the Human Rights Act. Anybody who thinks this is an exercise in improving human rights protection needs to seriously think again,' said the MP for Holborn and St. Pancras.

Gove is 'incorrect'

This week has been a busy one for the attorney general, who has also found the time to rubbish the justice secretary's suggestion that the renegotiated EU settlement was not 'legally binding' due to the overarching power of the European Court of Justice (ECJ).

Giving an interview to the BBC earlier this week, Michael Gove argued that the ECJ 'stands above every nation state' and could overturn Cameron's deal with EU leaders.

Despite recent claims that he was set to join the 'Vote Leave' camp, the attorney general appears to be backing the prime minister and the campaign for Britain to remain in the EU.

'The suggestion that this agreement does not have legal effect until it is incorporated into EU treaties is not correct. It has legal effect from the point the UK says it intends to remain in the EU, and the European court must take it into account.

The job of the European court is to interpret the agreements between the 28 nation states of the EU. This is one of those agreements, with equivalent legal force to other agreements such as treaties.'

The attorney general said this was far from just his opinion: 'It is the opinion of this government's lawyers, lawyers for the EU, and, I suspect, the majority of lawyers in this country.'