Human rights act 1998 evaluation:

• Ministers: Section 19 requires ministers to consider whether any legislation they are proposing is compatible with human rights and to make a statement of compatibility. This shows us that this process makes sure that the legal system respects the idea surrounding democracy.
• However one of the drawbacks of this is that the statement has no legal effect, which means that the legislators might ignore the human rights of an individual. This could lead to an increase usage of arbitrary power to the Prime Minister and legislatures. This was shown by the Rwanda immigration bill being passed through the Parliamentary law making process, even though the ECtHR has denied the creation of this piece of legislation due to it coming under conflict with the ECHR and declaring that it was incompatible. Thus undermining the core of a democratic society.
• However one of the drawbacks is that The British Bill of rights required the courts to give weight to the views of Parliament when balancing rights issues. This will lead to unfair outcomes due the judiciary being influenced by Parliament and making decisions that will benefit them rather than the claimant. Thus breaking the separation of powers principle.
• Reform of the Human rights act 1998 - one of the benefits of introducing a new permission stage, requiring claimants to prove they have (or would) suffer significant disadvantage as a result of a breach of their rights before they can take their claim to court. This means that there is a reduced backlog of cases that need to be heard within the Administrative section of the High court. Thus leading to faster responses and verdict
• Universalism The Human Rights act 1998 has, since its inception in 2000, provided a new dynamism in areas of the law where protections were otherwise slow to emerge. An example of this is with regards to gender recognition. However one of the drawbacks is that attempts to filter out rights from one group ultimately only succeed in diminishing the power of human rights for all. This is the difficulty that critics of the HRA struggle to come to terms with.
• Difficult cases: There are many cases to support the idea that the HRA has allowed the rights of an individual to be protected further, even if they don’t have the mental capacity to make a claim under the ECHR. This was shown in Cheshire West and Chester Council (2014) where a mentally ill person was restricted due to him not being able to wear no clothes whilst in his accommodation. This also shows us that the HRA is there to help the functioning of a democratic society and stop any arbitrary power being used.
• However one of the drawbacks is that some cases such as Othman (Abu Qatada) V UK (2012) - where the claimant, a terror suspect, was said to have abused the system by using repeated legal challenges under the HRA in attempt to resist extradition on terrorism charges. This means that the HRA is at fault for the large delay for processing human right cases.