Six QCs selected to probe need for UK Bill of Rights
21 March 2011 | By Katy Dowell
Related Articles
The defame game
25 March 2011
Nominations wanted for Pro Bono Awards
19 June 2007
Revealed: UK's most famous lawyer
12 September 2007
Silks who make the cut at the Supreme Court
14 November 2011
Bang to human rights
7 January 2013
The Government has selected six heavyweight silks to sit on an independent commission to examine whether there is a need for a UK Bill of Rights.
The commission, headed by former Permanent Secretary Sir Leigh Lewis, will look at the Human Rights Act and decide whether it properly reflects British freedoms. It is expected to report back to the Government no later than by the end of 2012.
The six silks are: 8 New Square’s Martin Howe QC; Blackstone Chambers’ Anthony Lester QC; Devereux Chambers’ Jonathan Fisher QC; Doughty Street Chambers’ Helena Kennedy QC; 4 Pump Court’s Anthony Speaight QC and Matrix Chambers’ Phillippe Sands QC.
The terms of the commission state that there will be no withdrawal from the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), despite political tension about the European obligation. Instead it will look to “incorporate and build on” ECHR obligations and “ensure that these rights continue to be enshrined in UK law”.
However, it will advise on the Interlaken process to reform the Strasbourg court ahead of and following the UK’s chairmanship of the Council of Europe.
Secretary of State for Justice Kenneth Clarke said: “The commission has a very important role to play in examining the operation of the European Court of Human Rights and how we implement human rights in the UK.
“I hope that this work will help to inform the debate on human rights at home and assist us as we continue to press for reform of the Strasbourg Court. I look forward to receiving their recommendations.”
The silks:
8 New Square’s Martin Howe QC
Specialises in intellectual property European Community law, data protection and commercial and public law. Keen supporter of a British bill of rights. Contributed to a paper for the Society of Conservative Lawyers concluding: “A British Bill of Rights would be much clearer to interpret and avoid political and utilitarian judgments. It would strive particularly to protect rights shown to be of historical importance in this country, such as relevant provisions of the Bill of Rights 1689, habeas corpus and judicial independence.”
Blackstone Chambers’ Anthony Lester QC
Liberal Democrat peer with a strong public law practice, has a long history in the human rights field. Between 1974 and 1976 he was special advisor to the then home secretary Roy Jenkins MP, with responsibility for policy advice on human rights.
Devereux Chambers’ Jonathan Fisher QC
Specialises in tax investigations, disputes and disclosures; proceeds of crime; business crime and corporate defence; commercial and investor fraud; financial services regulation. In 2006 Fisher wrote a paper for the Conservative Party on the Human Rights Act, concluding: “It is high time that a British Bill of Rights and Obligations is enacted, in order to restore the balance between individual rights and individual responsibilities.” Also past chairman of research for the Society of Conservative Lawyers
Doughty Street Chambers’ Helena Kennedy QC
A top criminal silk with who has held a series of public appointments including: current chair of legal reform group Justice; past Chair of the British Council and Chair of the Human Genetics Commission. Currently Investigating Officer of the Human Trafficking Commission in Scotland. Sits in the House of Lords.
4 Pump Court’s Anthony Speaight QC
Has a wide commercial practice with an interest in the relevance of public law to construction work. Acted in judicial review proceedings concerning the construction of the channel Tunnel Rail Link. Contributed to a paper for the Society of Conservative Lawyers, stating: “There is now an increasing acceptance that human rights should inform European law. Turning to the specific status of the Convention and effect upon it of a new Bill of Rights, it is clear that the Convention is a treaty which is incorporated but not entrenched in domestic law.”
Matrix Chambers’ Phillippe Sands QC
UCL Professor of Law and Director of the Centre on International Courts and Tribunals in the Faculty. Well respected in the field of international law and has done significant research in areas involving human rights.

Readers' comments (3)
D Mallender | 26-Mar-2011 1:35 pm
Nice to see so many women on this panel! So what did happen to Human Rights for women then in the English legal profession? The one representative cannot be everywhere at once can she. Come on who are you (the organisers of this farce) trying to fool. What a bizarre start to the consideration of an important matter. Which regime in the world can better that gender make up.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
M OBrien | 8-Apr-2011 5:40 pm
What are the politicians up to now the UK already has a Bill of Rights from 1688 which is still a current act of parliament which cannot be repealed.
http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentaryauthority/revolution/overview/billofrights/
Here it is
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/WillandMarSess2/1/2
The various governments over the past sixty years have petended that it does not exist but more and more people are aware of it and its importance to protecting the rights of British citizens, whatever they are doing it will not be for the benfit of the average person.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 14-Apr-2011 12:40 pm
Let's face it the panel isn't representative of the multicultural society in the UK at all. One woman? Really? How are we supposed to put our trust in something like this? Where's Chakrabati from Liberty? An absolute pioneer in this field and she's just ignored. Pathetic and typical!
We've just opted in to the EU directive on Anti-trafficking now we want to change our Human Rights Laws... M O'Brien you are right..."what are the politicians REALLY up to now" ?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment