|
Hunts
to sue government for breach of human rights
by Nick Mays
THE
GOVERNMENT faces the prospect of paying punitive damages under
European human rights legislation if it imposes an outright
ban on hunting.
The warning was made last week by Richard Burge, chief executive
of the Countryside Alliance, as he set out plans for the pro-hunting
campaign over the next few months, including at least one major
march in London.
The first mass rally - similar to the Countryside March in 1998
- is expected to attract up to 500,000 people, including many
from sporting organisations elsewhere in Europe which are alarmed
by the prospect of a hunting ban.
The date, possibly in July, or September to coincide with the
end of the Government’s six-month consultation on a Bill
on hunting, is expected to be decided by the Alliance board
in the next two weeks in consultation with the Metropolitan
Police.
The House of Commons voted overwhelmingly for an outright ban
last month by 386 votes to 175, rejecting any notion of a ‘Middle
Way’ optioin where hunting could continue in certain areas
under license. The following day, the House of Lords voted against
an outright ban on Foxhunting in their own debate on the issue
and delivered a huge vote in favour of the so-called ‘Middle
Way’, the peers backed the option of allowing fox hunting
under regulation by 366 votes to 59, a majority of 307.
The Prime Minister has made it clear that he would prefer to
see the issue settled by sensible ‘compromise’ legislation
which would allow for hunting to continue in areas where other
methods of fox control would not be sufficient. After both Houses
had voted, Rural Affairs Minister Alun Michael announced that
the Government would instigate a six month consultation period
between all concerned parties to ensure that ‘workable’;
legislation could be drawn up.
From this week, delegations from hunting communities will visit
regional offices of the Department for the Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs to press for the Government’s compromise
solution on hunting to be fair and tolerant.
The Alliance is supporting calls by a cross-party group of peers
for a joint committee of both Houses of Parliament to draw up
the proposed Bill, instead of leaving it to the Government to
draw up in secret.
Mr Burge said that the Alliance would be challenging the ban
on hunting passed by the Scottish Parliament in February well
in advance of the next hunting season in the late summer. Such
a challenge could also eventually apply to any law banning hunting
in England.
The Scottish Executive has yet to take the decision to bring
the ban into force but the Alliance’s lawyers have already
begun the process of a legal challenge.
The Alliance has already received strong legal opinion that
the Scottish ban goes against the Human Rights Act on a number
of grounds. It believes that if the Scottish Executive’s
determination to persist through the courts in the knowledge
that it was infringing the Human Rights Act could trigger punitive
fines.
Mr Burge said: “Our advice, which is very strong, is that
the Scottish Parliament has started down a path which they will
lose and lose in a big way.
“The longer they keep going and the more they damage people’s
lives, our view is that we won’t just be seeking compensation
for those damaged lives we will be seeking punishment of the
Scottish Executive through damages claims to make sure that
the Scottish Parliament realises the error of going down that
way again. If that is class retribution, it is class retribution
- the rural class on the suburban middle class in this case.”
Mr Burge said he hoped that the Scottish Executive realised
from day one that it was “on to a loser”. Individual
procurators fiscal would have to ask, probably by the autumn,
whether they really wanted to start arresting people under a
Bill which had already been thrown out by a first court. With
the human rights law still new, Mr Burge said the levels of
compensation that the Alliance would be seeking had yet to be
established.
It is believed that the Westminster Government is keen to avoid
a lengthy and costly legal confrontation with the Alliance and
is determined to “get the legislation right” and thus
prevent the issue of hunting from becoming an annual fiasco
for the Parliamentary process.
The outcome of any legal action against the Scottish Executive
will be studied closely by Ministers in Whitehall with this
in mind.
Turning to the planned London rally, Mr Burge promised that
the demonstration would be legitimate, law abiding and “there
would be no civil disobedience”.
He said: “We want people in urban centres looking at their
TV or their newspapers saying, `What on earth has gone wrong
when decent people like us have to take to the streets in order
to defend their way of life and the things that matter to them.’
“He said that any government which played on democracy
and liberty on the world stage would have to consider “how
would that play if their own citizens are demonstrating on the
streets.”
|
