The British government took the "historic" step towards incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into British law yesterday when the Home Secretary, Mr Jack Straw, announced a Human Rights Bill he pledged would "significantly improve the protection of basic human rights".
However, at the same time as the government published a White Paper yesterday setting out its proposals to bring British law in line with the European Convention, the Tories criticised the Bill, claiming it would allow judges to direct parliament's ability to make laws.
And although civil rights groups welcomed the Bill, there was a possibility, they said, it would not have the legal teeth necessary to be an effective instrument of redress.
Under the government's proposals people who believe their human rights have been violated will be able to bring their case to the British courts rather than seeking redress in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
It is also proposed that while judges will not be given the power to "strike down" existing law where it conflicts with the European Convention, there will be a new "fast-track" procedure to amend future legislation if it is found to be incompatible with it.
Mr Straw said the Bill, based on New Zealand's Bill of Rights, would mean people who believed their human rights had been violated "no longer have to tread the long and hard road" to the Human Rights Court in Strasbourg. The convention protects, for example, the right to privacy, a fair trial and freedom of conscience and religion.
"It is the first time since 1689 that there will have been a British Bill of Rights. The UK had a major role in drafting the convention and was the first to ratify it in 1951. But we have been almost alone in Europe in not incorporating it into our own law. Now, nearly 50 years later, the British people's rights are coming home," Mr Straw said.
Earlier, as the shadow home secretary, Sir Brian Mawhinney, warned the Bill would enable judges "to tell parliament what laws they should and should not pass", the civil rights group Liberty said human rights law should take precedence over other legislation. It was also a source of some disappointment that the government had not announced a Human Rights Commission to actively promote human rights cases.
Liberty also said that people would be forced to take their case to the Human Rights Court if an act of parliament overrode a violation of the convention.
Despite the criticisms the director of Liberty, Mr John Wadham, described the publication of the Bill as "remarkable".