With reference to the recent editorial on the Human Rights Act and mental health legislation (Reference Bindman, Maingay and SzmuklerBindman et al, 2003), the ‘steady trickle’ of human rights cases rather than a flood is not surprising when considered in context of the history of UK human rights.

Since 1965 UK organisations and individuals have had the right to petition under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). This was then made binding on the British Government when we joined the European Union in 1973, under Article 189. Since then, British courts have had to take into account the ECHR in their decisions and judgements. So since 1973 we have been subject to the influence of the ECHR, which is nearly identical to the Human Rights Act.

What is new in the Human Rights Act 1998? There are no new rights but, as Bindman et al stated, it is easier to pursue alleged injustices. However, a major difference is frequently overlooked — only a directly affected individual can pursue legal challenges. Under the ECHR anyone with sufficient interest (i.e. pressure groups or interest groups) could petition. In the Human Rights Act this has been limited to individual ‘victims’ only. Potentially, this leaves some vulnerable individuals, such as those with mental health problems or learning disabilities, disenfranchised under the Human Rights Act, having still to rely upon the ECHR to protect them.