Target: Theresa May, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
Goal: Don’t replace the Human Rights Act with domestic legislation, which would damage the UK’s human rights standing.
The leadership of the United Kingdom has plans to drop the 1998 Human Rights Act, an internationally-based law, and replace it with domestically-drafted legislation. This move could seriously damage the UK’s international human rights standing and could result in individual difficulties for people living in the UK. Sign the petition and urge the United Kingdom not to abandon the Human Rights Act.
The Human Rights Act codifies many basic human rights, such as the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and freedom of assembly. It also guarantees the right to privacy and the expectation of being innocent until proven guilty. These are human rights that should be upheld by every government on earth. Legislators in favor of replacing the Human Rights Act argue that domestic legislation will cover more or less the same ground, but critics are concerned that “pick and mix” laws will leave severe gaps in coverage.
Human rights activists warn that the Human Rights Act is more relevant in the UK now than ever before, as post-Brexit sentiment stirs strong anti-immigrant and isolationist rhetoric. There are fears that the replacement of the Human Rights Act would result in a loss of protections for some of the UK’s most vulnerable residents.
There is no need to change a law that provides such essential protections for so many. Sign the petition and urge the United Kingdom not to drop the Human Rights Act.
Dear Prime Minister,
I am writing to urge you not to drop the 1998 Human Rights Act in favor of domestic human rights legislation. The Act provides a number of important protections for the United Kingdom’s most vulnerable citizens, and its replacement in a post-Brexit climate could prove very damaging for UK residents.
The Human Rights Act sets an internationally-agreed-upon standard of human rights. It is the most basic possible understanding of human rights, and the idea that some legislators would like to replace it worries me. If this barebones understanding of human rights is somehow too much to maintain, what would a domestically-drafted piece of legislation look like? What kind of gaps might it contain? I am very concerned that new legislation would not cover the same basic protections as the Human Rights Act.
I hope you will consider the ramifications of replacing the Human Rights Act, and I ultimately hope that you will maintain it rather than replace it.
[Your Name Here]
Photo credit: UK Parliament