The Prime Minister expressed unease about the way the judiciary was riding roughshod over the democratic process and using human rights legislation to introduce a privacy law by the back door.
“What ought to happen in a parliamentary democracy is that Parliament, which you elect and put there, should decide how much protection we want for individuals and how much freedom of the press and the rest of it. So I am a little uneasy about what is happening.”
“I think there is a question here about privacy and the way our system works,” Mr Cameron said.
“Judges are using the European Convention on Human Rights to deliver a sort of privacy law without Parliament saying so. I think that we do need to have a proper sit back and think: is this right, is this the right thing to happen?
But you see, that\’s the effect of having these overarching laws with such concepts as a \”right to private life\” into a Common Law system. You\’ve said, by having the Human Rights Act, which contains such a provision, that there is now this right in law to a private private life.
And the judges, judging the cases that come before them, have to try and work out what this means. What actually is the law?
If you\’d specified what it was in the original legislation (OK, previous government, if it had been specified) then the judges would be judging on what was specified.
Not, as they are, making it up as they go along which is the best that they can do in the current situation.
The is the legislature\’s fault, no one else\’s.