© Reuters/Darren StaplesBritain's Prime Minister David Cameron delivers his keynote address to the Conservative Party Conference in Birmingham, central England October 1, 2014.
Speaking on the final day of the Conservative Party's four-day conference, Cameron pledged to scrap the act and replace it with a British "bill of rights."
However, the prime minister did not explicitly confirm that a future Conservative government would withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights - a move that would have far-reaching repercussions for Britain's relationship with Europe.
But legal experts and civil liberties campaigners suggest the PM's pledge to repeal the Act could radically transform Britain's relationship with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
Kate Allen, head of Amnesty International, denounced the PM's controversial policy proposal, emphasizing that the Human Rights Act has historically been a bedrock of social, legal, and economic protection. "It's disappointing to hear the PM vowing to scrap the Human Rights Act when it has done so much good. We should be defending it," she said.
In his address, designed to relay the Tories' self-styled vision for Britain's social and economic future, the PM sharply criticized the Court. "It's not just the European Union that needs sorting out - it's the European Court of Human Rights," he stated.
"When that charter was written, in the aftermath of the Second World War, it set out the basic rights we should respect. But since then, interpretations of that charter have led to a whole lot of things that are frankly wrong."
© Reuters/Vincent KesslerJudges of the European Court of Human Rights are seen during an hearing at the court in Strasbourg
"Rulings to stop us deporting suspected terrorists. The suggestion that you've got to apply the human rights convention even on the battlefields of Helmand. And now - they want to give prisoners the vote. I'm sorry, I just don't agree," Cameron said.
Speaking to conference delegates, the PM argued that Britain should not "require instruction" on such issues from judges located in Strasbourg. He added that the Conservatives' proposed move to repeal the Human Rights Act would effectively allow for the passing of a bill of rights rooted in British values.
The ECHR reportedly issues ten judgments against Britain out of a total of 1,500 legal challenges brought against the UK government each year. Legal experts claim that while some of these judgments have roused a degree of controversy among UK ministers and media outlets, their real impact has been minimal.
Conference speeches from Justice Secretary Chris Grayling and Home Secretary Theresa May on Tuesday revealed little about the Conservative perspective on human rights. But Cameron's proposed legislative change offered a glimpse into social and economic Britain under a re-elected Tory government.
The PM's Human Rights Act vow and pledge to introduce a UK bill of rights has been a long-term Tory agenda. The party's eurosceptic wing has been particularly vocal with respect to the ECHR, with Grayling and May consistently stating that Britain could reject it on the Conservatives' watch.
Director of Liberty Shami Chakrabarti condemned Cameron's suggested legislative overhaul, arguing the move could considerably impact upon Britain's adherence to human rights law.
"Shame on the prime minister for citing Churchill, while promising to trash his legacy. The Convention protects both prisoners of war and soldiers sent off to fight and die with inadequate equipment. But the Prime Minister believes there is no place for human rights in Helmand - on that, he and ISIS agree," she said.
Hancock warned that "human rights are not in the gift of politicians to give" and "must not be made a political plaything to be bestowed or scrapped on a whim."
... this inveterate ass-clown, PM David Cameron, and the other ruling elites in the UK are simply stripping common Brits of their rights, leaving them essentially naked against the steady onslaught of corporate, banking and government predations planned and already occurring to the hapless British subjects. These open assaults are not even thinly veiled, but instead are shoved down the collective throats of British peoples, no matter how many % of voters scream, "NO!" to this or that publicly scheduled loss of rights or protections.
And yet, in the final analysis, these British 'subjects' seem to simply 'take it and like it', as you don't see them out tearing down the walls of Parliament, or screaming for their MPs or the Royal's blood. They are alternatively cheated, poisoned, taxed, ignored, spied upon, false-flag attacked, taxed, ridiculed, ignored, stripped of rights, told lies, taxed, spoken down to, ignored (and then ignored and taxed some more) by their elected 'leaders', yet the electorate happily puts these odious sphincters right back into power at seemingly every opportunity.
One has to wonder just how much of the seemingly ubiquitous utter complacency seen amongst the general public is due to psycho-chemical lobotomization via junk foods and subliminal message-laden junk media......