§ Lord Spensasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they have formulated and delivered their response to the Committee of Ministers, under the Convention of Human Rights, in respect of the judgment in November 1996 in Saunders v United Kingdom (1197 23 EHRR 313); and whether they will place details of their response in the Library of the House. [HL43]
§ The Minister of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Clinton-Davis)The costs of £75,000 awarded by the European Court of Human Rights to the applicant inSaunders v United Kingdom have been paid. Her Majesty's Government is considering the terms of its response but has not yet delivered to the Committee of Ministers which, under the Convention, is the body charged with supervising the execution of the Court's judgment, their proposals for measures to be taken in response to the judgment.
§ Lord Spensasked Her Majesty's Government:
What action they intend to take concerning the "unsatisfactory position" disclosed by the Lord Chief Justice in his judgment in the Court of Appeal in R v Morrisey and R v Staines in relation, specifically, to the judgment in the European Court of Human Rights in Saunders v United Kingdom. [HL44]
4WA
§ Lord Clinton-DavisThe Human Rights Bill is currently before this House. Clause 1 specifies those articles of the European Convention on Human Rights (including Article 6—Right to a Fair Trial) ("the Convention rights") which are given further effect by the Bill. Clause 2 provides that a court or tribunal determining a question in connection with a Convention right must take account of relevant judgments of the Court of Human Rights. Clause 4 provides that specified courts (including the Court of Appeal) may make a "declaration of incompatibility" where they are satisfied that a provision of primary legislation is incompatible with the Convention rights.