§ Sir Nicholas LyellTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the occasions on which Her Majesty's Government have been obliged to bring forward(a) primary legislation and (b) secondary legislation, in order to comply with the United Kingdom's treaty obligations to keep its domestic law in conformity with the European Convention on Human Rights. [27078]
§ Mr. Tony LloydPrimary legislation has been brought forward in order to implement the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the following cases:
- Sunday Times (1979)
- Young, James and Webster (1981)
- X (Mental patient) (1981)
- Campbell and Cosans (1982)
- Malone (1984)
- O, H, W, B and R (Parental access) (1987)
- Thynne, Wilson and Gunnell (1990)
- Boner and Maxwell (1994)
- Hussain and Singh (1996)
- Chahal (1996)
Secondary legislation has been brought forward in order to implement the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the following cases:
545W
- Golder (1975)
- Dudgeon (1981)
- Silver and Others (1983)
- Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali (1985)
- McCallum (1990)
- Campbell (1992)
- McMichael (1995)
- Benham (1996)
In relation to the cases of Fox, Campbell and Hartley (1990), Findlay (1997) and Coyne (1977), changes in primary legislation had already been made which in the Government's view ensured that United Kingdom law was compatible with the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.
Primary and secondary legislation may have also been enacted in order to implement decisions of the Committee of Ministers in cases where reports of the European Commission of Human Rights have been transmitted to them under Article 32 of the Convention, but this information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.