Human rights are not a "red card" to be played by landowning interests to obstruct debate on land reform.
You may be forgiven for thinking that when reading headlines about the Scottish Government's land reform plans allegedly costing taxpayers £600 million in compensation bills.
Nor are human rights a "trump card" offering an "absolute right to buy" for non-landowning interests. This alarms landowners and polarises the debate.
In fact human rights underpin the public interest, not any vested interest.
Realisation of this opens up the common space for informed and constructive dialogue and takes red cards and trump cards off the table.
First, the right of public participation means that everyone should have the opportunity to have a say in deciding where the public interest lies on land reform. This enables an evolving process in which a changing society determines what is the relationship between land and people.
Secondly, internationally agreed human rights provide the framework and guidance towards determining the public interest.
For example, this September the United Nations will adopt the Sustainable Development Goals (to replace the Millennium Development Goals, 2000-2015) and Scotland will need to start to form its own strategic plan to meet the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. The UN General Assembly has resolved that the goals should be shaped in accordance with the international human rights framework.
This framework includes but goes beyond the European Convention Human on Rights (ECHR).
It is the ECHR which is most often referred to in the land reform debate in Scotland. This is because it is part of our domestic law and also because it includes the right to "peaceful enjoyment of possessions". However the ECHR also states that this right needs to be balanced with the public interest and permits a government to control the use of land. This is why, for example, compulsory purchase orders have been around for a long time and comply with the ECHR.
However, it is the broader international human rights framework that needs to become more visible in this debate in Scotland because it helps to inform the public interest.
For example, the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights states that individuals have the right to an adequate standard of living, including the right to adequate housing, food, decent work and the highest attainable standard of health.
Whilst clearly not all of these rights can be immediately guaranteed overnight in all countries, governments have agreed that they do have the duty to use the maximum available resources to progressively realise these rights.
Looked at through a human rights lens, land then is to be seen as a national asset, part of the available resources to realise everyone's rights. Whether owned privately or in any other way, it should serve the public interest.
Of course this certainly does not mean that all responsible landowners, including our farming community, should be dispossessed. Nor, however, does it mean that a government is powerless if, for example, abandoned or neglected land can be put to better public use.
It does mean that the balance of power between landowner and non-landowner needs to continue to shift. This itself will lead to more constructive dialogue between landowners and communities, with access to law being the last resort to determine the public interest. It will promote the better use of land, whether private or otherwise.
Scotland does appear to be considering this direction of travel.
A Land Reform Bill is to be brought before the Scottish Parliament very soon. This is a real opportunity for public debate and for parliament to set off on this journey.
A Land Rights and Responsibilities Policy Statement is likely to be considered by parliament as part of this Bill. The Scottish Government draft states as its first principle that "the ownership and use of land should be in the public interest and contribute to the collective benefit of the people of Scotland".
This is a promising and welcome start, but only a start. Learning from and contributing to international experience and practice, including the human rights framework, will help take us all forward together.
Alan Miller is chairman of the Scottish Human Rights Commission.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article