Source · Select Committees · Human Rights (Joint Committee)
1st Report - Draft Human Rights Act 1998 (Remedial) Order: Judicial Immunity: Second Report
Human Rights (Joint Committee)
HC 325
Published 22 June 2026
Recommendations
7
Given the passage of time since the judgment in the SW case, we recommend that...
Recommendation
Given the passage of time since the judgment in the SW case, we recommend that both Houses should approve the draft remedial order. (Recommendation, Paragraph 57)
Ministry of Justice
View Details →
8
The committee welcomes the government’s commitment to review how section 9(3) of the Human Rights...
Recommendation
The committee welcomes the government’s commitment to review how section 9(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 is operating. The government should carry out that review as quickly as possible, keep the committee informed about its progress, and commit to …
Read more
Ministry of Justice
View Details →
Conclusions (6)
1
Conclusion
We remind the department that Parliament expects the government to respond to the report of a committee within two months. If the department is not able to provide a response within two months, it must write to the committee to explain the delay. (Conclusion, Paragraph 17) The draft remedial order
2
Conclusion
The committee accepts the government’s view that there is a “compelling reason” to make a remedial order. (Conclusion, Paragraph 38)
3
Conclusion
The committee accepts that this is not a case where it would be appropriate to use the urgent procedure. (Conclusion, Paragraph 40)
4
Conclusion
The committee is content that the “required information” has been provided. (Conclusion, Paragraph 43)
5
Conclusion
There are no points in the draft remedial order to which the special attention of each House should be drawn. (Conclusion, Paragraph 47)
6
Conclusion
Although the draft remedial order is narrowly drafted, it would remove the specific incompatibility identified in the SW case. (Conclusion, Paragraph 56)