Towards this direction it is supported that 'Britain has one of the worst human rights records in Europe and faces investigation over its failure to comply with a series of European court rulings'1. On the other hand, the recognition of human rights in Britain has been often related with specific sectors of the society, like the health sector. In this context, it has been noticed that 'there was much speculation about the potential impact of the Human Rights Act 1998 on established principles of health care practice; now the statute has been "bedded in", predictions that existing good practice would not fall foul of the legislation provided it was demonstrable, have proved to be broadly accurate'2. As it will be explained below, the Human Rights Act 1998 has been extensively transformed through a series of laws that have been published since 1998 (i.e. ...
rights in England: 'human rights remain at the heart of the foreign policy agenda and the UK works through international forums and bilateral relationships to spread the values of human rights, civil liberties and democracy'3. This paper will evaluate the development of English law on human rights in comparison with the international law on the specific issue (with a special reference to USA and Australia). In this context, the EU laws and the laws of countries within the international community, like USA and Australia, are going to be examined in order to identify the main elements of human rights law as they are highlighted and respected by countries internationally. The potential conflict among existed legislation will be also discussed (if identified) and appropriate courses of action are going to be suggested.
In order to understand the criteria used by legislators around the world (including UK) in order to develop the various provisions regulated the human rights we should refer primarily to all aspects of human rights as a concept of significant importance for both governments and public within the international community. In this context, it is stated that human rights can be characterized as 'basic moral guarantees that people in all countries and cultures allegedly have simply because they are people'4. On the other hand, it is supported that 'the term 'human rights' has mainly positive associations (with liberty, security, freedom of expression etc) but there is little understanding of the application of human rights / the HRA to normal life / public service delivery'5. In accordance with the above definitions, human rights should be extensively protected by the law because they are the rights that guarantee the development (personal, social