Equalities watchdog calls on public authorities to improve human rights record

Many public authorities have a good track record in using human rights principles to protect the public but more could be done to tackle issues such as the abuse of vulnerable people in care, the lack of caravan sites for Gypsies and Travellers, and patchy protection of the right to a private life, the Equality and Human Rights Commission has said.

In the second report as part of its How Fair is Britain? series, intended to assess how well the country meets its human rights obligations, the EHRC warned that some groups which are socially marginalised or vulnerable did not receive full protection of their rights.

The Commission set out ten areas where it considered that legislation, institutions, policy or services could protect human rights more fully:

1. Health and social care
2. Children in the justice system
3. Police custody and prisons – support for vulnerable adults
4. Investigations into deaths in custody
5. Legal aid provisions
6. Protection of the right to a private life
7. Human rights of some groups
8. Counter-terrorism and public order legislation
9. Torture allegations
10. Immigration procedures and detention

More detail on these areas is set out below.

The Commission called for the core principles of human rights – dignity, equality and respect for everyone – to receive more emphasis. It insisted that the evidence showed that where public bodies take human rights seriously, people are treated better.

Geraldine Van Bueren, Commissioner at the Equality and Human Rights Commission, said: “Britain has a long and passionate commitment to human rights. Because of this commitment, most people in Britain can live their lives as they wish to, free from government control or interference. However, we cannot take our rights for granted.

“All of us benefit from human rights because these improve our daily lives. Human rights should not only get our attention when people we might not like try to use these rights. Nor should the value of human rights be limited to when we see what happens to people in other countries when these rights do not exist.”

The report can be downloaded here.

The EHRC's areas for improvement

Health and social care

The EHRC said that health and social care commissioners and service providers “do not always understand their human rights obligations and the regulator’s approach is not always effective in identifying and preventing human rights abuses”.

The watchdog argued that some vulnerable users of health and social care services – such as older or disabled people – experience poor treatment “which is undignified and humiliating”.

The EHRC added that the reason for this could lie partly with the scope of the HRA and agencies’ poor understanding of their responsibilities under the Act.

It pointed to its recent inquiry into home care which showed that many local authorities and primary care trusts have a poor understanding of their positive obligations under the HRA, and do not include human rights in the commissioning criteria around the quality and delivery of care.

“Frontline staff also do not make the link between human rights and the care they provide, and their lack of awareness can lead to abuse and neglect of patients,” the Commission said.

The EHRC also questioned the effectiveness of inspections by the Care Quality Commission, whose approach has “sometimes failed to identify and prevent abuses of human rights”.

Another issue is that service users do not know how to make complaints, or do not do so, as they fear this might adversely affect their care.

Children in the justice system

“The justice system sometimes does not prioritise the best interests of the child,” the EHRC said.

The watchdog added that children would not receive a fair trial if they do not understand the gravity of charges against them or are unable to participate in court procedures. It said in particular that children with learning or communication difficulties often do not receive sufficient ‘special measures’ to ensure a fair trial.

The report also claimed that the juvenile secure estate “resorts too easily to control and restraint procedures for discipline”.

Police custody and prisons – support for vulnerable adults

According to the Commission, police custody and prisons do not always have sufficient safeguards and support when dealing with vulnerable adults. This meant that the government risked not complying with its obligation under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights to safeguard the lives of those in its care.

The EHRC argued that some prisons did not meet the mental health needs of prisoners as policies to prevent suicide and self-harm “were not consistently implemented, and care plans were poorly co-ordinated”.

Unsafe use of restraint remained a problem across all forms of detention, it added. This had led to cases where restraint had led to the death of a prisoner.

Investigations into deaths in custody

“Investigations into deaths of people under protection of the state are not always independent, prompt or public, potentially breaching right to life investigative requirements,” the EHRC said.

The review found that Britain’s investigative frameworks did not always meet requirements. Ofsted and local safeguarding children boards are obliged to carry out a review following any unexpected death of a child or young person in a secure children’s home.

“Such a review does not meet Article 2 requirements as it does not establish the cause of death, involve the family, is not carried out in public and is not institutionally independent,” the Commission said.

The watchdog also pointed out that there is no single person or agency automatically responsible for investigating deaths of patients in mental health settings.

“To meet Article 2 requirements, an inquest may need information that is obtained from an independent investigation immediately after the death,” the EHRC said.

“Investigations by strategic health authorities may not meet this requirement and the coronial system is not sufficiently responsive or properly resourced to undertake effective investigations. The Article 2 safeguarding duty should also cover mental health patients who are not formally detained.

Legal aid provision

The EHRC said providing a system of legal aid was a significant part of how Britain met its obligations to protect the right to a free trial and the right to liberty and security, adding that changes ran the risk of weakening this.

It also warned amongst other things that the current fixed fees system for social welfare cases created incentives for lawyers and advisers to choose more straightforward cases. “This means that people with complicated or unusual cases may be less likely to receive high quality advice,” the Commission claimed.

Protection of the right to a private life

The legislative and regulatory framework does not offer sufficient protection of the right to a private life and for balancing the right to a private life with other rights, the watchdog said.

It described the protection provided by the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) as “patchy”.

“Definitions of ‘personal data’ which are central to DPA are not clear; and RIPA has not responded effectively to technological changes which enable more extensive surveillance of individuals,” the Commission said.

The EHRC also warned that the Information Commissioner’s Office did not have adequate resources to carry out its functions effectively and there was insufficient judicial oversight of RIPA and surveillance regulations.

Human rights of some groups

The review suggested that some groups which are socially marginalised or particularly vulnerable did not enjoy full protection of their rights.

The EHRC cited a number of examples:

• Local authorities, police or social services sometimes failed to fulfil their positive obligation to intervene in cases of children, disabled people, and women at risk of domestic violence;
• Police sometimes failed to take seriously allegations of repeated violence that were so severe the allegations reached the threshold for inhuman and degrading treatment under Article 3;
• Local agencies sometimes failed to work together effectively, and in some cases this had led to the death of a child or disabled person;
• Ethnic minority groups were more likely to be subject to stop and search and counter-terrorism legislation, and have their details recorded on the National DNA Database;
• The rights of Gypsies and Travellers were sometimes overlooked. “Gypsy and Traveller communities face a shortage of caravan sites as some local authorities have failed to invest in site development,” the EHRC said. “The lack of sufficient sites means it is difficult for Gypsies and Travellers to practice their traditional way of life”;
• Individuals who are transsexual and whose gender identity does not match their birth gender are not protected by current laws around marriage and civil partnership;
• Although Britain has a positive record in developing the legal and administrative infrastructure to tackle trafficking, victims may still be criminalised or sent to immigration detention centres. “In some cases trafficked children have been sent to adult prisons when charged with offences, or incorrect age assessments have meant that they have not been offered the support and protection due every child”;
• Evidence suggests that measures to curb the activities of gangmasters are not adequate to protect migrant workers, and proposed changes to the visa requirements for migrant domestic workers may lead to Article 4 breaches. The number of prosecutions and convictions for slavery, trafficking and forced labour are low.

Counter-terrorism and public order legislation

According to the EHRC, counter-terrorism and public order legislation designed to protect everyone can risk undermining several human rights.

The watchdog said there were problems with the interpretation and implementation of counter-terrorism legislation domestically, and with Britain’s international counter-terrorism activities. It criticised the impact of counter-terrorism legislation on legitimate expression of politcial views and gatherings, with the definition of terrorism “still too broad”.

Torture allegations

“Allegations of involvement and complicity in torture in overseas territories, and the government’s failure so far to carry out an independent inquiry into these allegations, risk breaching Article 3,” the EHRC said.

Immigration procedures and detention

The watchdog claimed that immigration procedures can favour administrative convenience over safeguarding individuals’ rights to liberty and security. “Periods in detention can be unlawful if release or removal is not imminent,” it said.

Philip Hoult