What the Human Rights Act does
The Human Rights Act 1998 brought the rights in the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic law. Before it, a person had to take a case all the way to Strasbourg. Since it came into force in 2000, they can rely on those rights in a British court, and public authorities must act compatibly with them. The debate over the treaty behind it is on should the UK leave the ECHR.
How it works, section by section
The design matters. Section 2 tells courts to take account of Strasbourg rulings. Section 3 tells them to read all legislation, as far as possible, compatibly with the Convention. Section 4 lets senior courts issue a declaration of incompatibility when they cannot. Section 6 makes it unlawful for a public authority to breach Convention rights. One thing it does not do is let courts strike down an Act of Parliament, which is what keeps it, in theory, inside parliamentary sovereignty.
Why it is controversial
Critics argue that section 3 lets judges rewrite the meaning of statutes, and that section 2 tied British courts too tightly to Strasbourg. Supporters argue it simply lets ordinary people enforce basic rights at home, cheaply and quickly. On the Starkey account the Act is the hinge of the legal constitution, the single change that did most to move power to the courts.
The repeal debate
Repealing the Act, and replacing it with a British Bill of Rights, has moved from the fringe to Conservative and Reform policy, bound up with the question of leaving the ECHR. The Labour government wants to keep the Act and change how it is used. What a government could actually do is set out on the plan.