The UK Constitutional Law Group and the UK Human Rights Blog have published interesting analyses on whether a public body can have rights (as a victim) under the UK’s Human Rights Act. A 2012 England & Wales High Court judgment granted an injunction to a public authority, citing Protocol 1 Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Olympic Delivery Authority v Persons Unknown concerned the granting of an injunction to prevent protesters from blocking deliveries to London’s Olympic village. The protesters made submissions based on Article 10 (freedom of expression) and Article 11 (freedom of association) of the ECHR. The judge dismissed the protesters’ defences on the basis that these rights needed to be balanced against the Olympic Delivery Authority’s right to property under Protocol 1 Article 1 of the ECHR (right to peaceful enjoyment of property).
The UK Human Rights Blog says the decision appears to be flawed on the basis that public authorities cannot satisfy the “victim” requirement under Article 34 ECHR. This bestows the right to apply to the Strasbourg court upon “any person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to be a victim of a violation”. Cases before the court usually concern only one defendant – the contracting state. Thus, Article 34 draws an important distinction between a non – governmental organisation (who can sue) and a governmental one (who can be sued).
Click here to read the UK Human Rights Blog article.
This distinction in turn raises interesting questions as to what constitutes a public authority. The UK Constitutional Law Group cites the case Aston Cantlow, where Lord Nicholson listed obvious examples of public authorities and the basis for their classification: “[B]ehind the instinctive classification of these organisations as bodies whose nature is governmental lie factors such as possession of special powers, democratic accountability, public funding in whole or in part, an obligation to act only in the public interest, and a statutory constitution.”
Click here to read the UK Constitutional Law Group article.