When acting under statutory powers or duties, a decision-maker must now think as follows:
Am I reading the relevant legislation which empowers me to do what I am planning in the first place, and giving effect to it, in a way that is compatible with Convention rights, as far as it possible to do so, given the words of the Act?
Does my action or decision affect somebody’s Convention rights? If so, is what I propose doing, at first glance, incompatible with it, or an interference with it?
If so, (even if the Convention right in question is an apparently absolute right) am I proposing the incompatible action or interference because there is a UK statute in question which requires me to act in that way? Or a regulation which cannot be read in any other way, other than incompatibly with the right in question, given the way it is worded, and given the way its ‘parent’ statutory provision is worded?
If not so compelled or required, is the incompatibility or interference (in relation to limited and qualified rights) within the scope of the allowable interferences, referred to in the Convention itself, and proportionate to the problem that I am trying to solve?
This could be translated into a checklist or flow chart, which would assist the cascading of training for the new culture.
