Repeal the HRA and Rely on the Common Law?

This piece contemplates whether the common law could fill the gaps in human rights protection if the UK's Human Rights Act 1998 were to be repealed. It looks at how the common law protected human rights before the Act came into force, what difference the Act has made, how the common law has become side-lined as a result, how in recent cases it has begun to play a more central role, and what more more needs to be done to develop it in ways which ensure that if the Human Rights Act were to be repealed it would not be particularly missed.

Hyperbolic Polaritonic Crystals Based on Nanostructured Nanorod Metamaterials

Surface plasmon polaritons usually exist on a few suitable plasmonic materials; however, nanostructured plasmonic metamaterials allow a much broader range of optical properties to be designed. Here, bottom-up and top-down nanostructuring are combined, creating hyperbolic metamaterial-based photonic crystals termed hyperbolic polaritonic crystals, allowing free-space access to the high spatial frequency modes supported by these metamaterials.

Human Rights in Northern Ireland in 2013

This is a report of the variety of developments in human rights law in Northern Ireland during the calendar year 2013. It pays particular attention to references to human rights issues in judicial decisions taken within Northern Ireland.

Failure to produce an anti-poverty strategy: The Committee on the Administration’s Application [2015] NIQB 59, June 30, 2015

This is a note on the Northern Ireland High Court decision of 30 June 2015 that the Northern Ireland Executive had acted unlawfully in failing to fulfil its statutory duty to adopt a strategy setting out proposals for tackling poverty, social exclusion and patterns of deprivation based on objective need.

Reigning Supreme: Events at the UK Supreme Court in 2015

This short article provides statistics on the number of decisions issued by the UK Supreme Court during 2015 and highlights some of the most interesting of them.

The planning and control of operations involving the use of lethal force

This is an analysis of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the obligation on States to plan and control the use of potentially lethal force by their police and military personnel. It illustrates the Court's attachment to the strict or careful scrutiny test and suggests how the Court might want to develop its jurisprudence in the future.

The Extra-territorial Obligations of European States regarding Human Rights in the Context of Terrorism

This chapter focuses on the growing tendency of international human rights law to require states to protect the rights of non-nationals who are in the state unlawfully and of nationals and non-nationals who are outside the state, especially when any of these people are involved in terrorist or counter-terrorist activity. It reviews these additional obligations within a European context, focusing on EU law and the law of the European Convention on Human Rights and drawing on the case law of UK courts. Part 1 considers when a European state must grant asylum to alleged terrorists on the basis that otherwise they would suffer human rights abuses in the state from which they are fleeing. Part 2 examines whether, outside of asylum claims, a European state must not deport or extradite an alleged terrorist because he or she might suffer an abuse of human rights in the receiving state. Part 3 looks at whether a European state whose security forces are engaged in counter-terrorism activities abroad is obliged to protect the human rights of the individuals serving in those forces and/or the human rights of the alleged terrorists they are confronting. While welcoming the extension of state responsibility, the chapter notes that it is occurring in a way which introduces three aspects of relativity into the protection of human rights. First, European law protects only some human rights extra-territorially. Second, it protects those rights only when there is ‘a real risk’ of their being violated. Third, sometimes it protects those rights only when there is a real risk of their being violated ‘flagrantly’.