It must be pure hell for them….

[motorbiking]

You, who hold an ideological opposing view, see my reasoned responses, backed up with links and evidence to support my quoted data, as "preaching"
What a surprise!


If they are, then the description fits.


Because you have an ideological opposing view to mine, it's not surprising that you'll resort to ad hominem attacks.
Do I resort to ad hominem attacks?
Double standards, don't you think?

Case closed.

You made my point perfectly- thanks.

 

[motorbiking]

If they did withdraw from the ECHR, the Good Friday Agreement also fails.

Does The Good Friday Agreement Depend On The ECHR? - EachOther

The European Convention on Human Rights is enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement, the power-sharing arrangement in Northern Ireland.

eachother.org.uk

Could the government retain the ECHR for NI, and ignore it for England, Scotland and Wales?

It doesn’t need to. Nobody is talking about abandoning human rights. Only the external “interference” is being questioned. You should remember that treaties have to be enshrined in domestic law otherwise they are meaningless promises.

The Good Friday agreement need not be harmed.

They would have the small challenge of external oversight but that is no different to brexit.

The

 

[ellal]

Nobody is talking about abandoning human rights.

Wrong!

The nasty party is talking about it...

Because they are proposing withdrawal from the ECHR without any other check/law on basic human rights in the UK being put in place beforehand!

Unless of course you can prove otherwise?

 

[ellal]

Mishal: Why has the new immigration act not actually been used to detain and deport anyone?
Suella: Because it hasn't completely come into force yet.
Mishal: But it was your new flagship policy? When will it be implemented?
Suella: When the Rwanda plan is deemed lawful and Strasbourg stop interfering.
Mishal: So it might never fully come in to force?
Suella: Erm....blame the Supreme Court and Strasbourg, not me.

Good old Suella...

Cruella blames anyone but herself for the c*ck up that the UK finds itself in...

And she wants to circumvent the legal system in the UK as regards asylum seekers...

A 'populist diversion'!

She has said "she would "do what it takes" to stop them even if "thwarted by the courts"

So no respect for the law!

Which is ironic...

She is the ultimate 'Aunt Jemima'...

The worst kind of racist!

 

[Roy Bloom]

It doesn’t need to. Nobody is talking about abandoning human rights. Only the external “interference” is being questioned. You should remember that treaties have to be enshrined in domestic law otherwise they are meaningless promises.

The Good Friday agreement need not be harmed.

They would have the small challenge of external oversight but that is no different to brexit.

The

With your supposed legal background, you should realise that if one treaty depends on another for a standard of behaviour, a withdrawal from the one invalidates the other.

Additionally, the ECHR is a protection for citizens from the government's behaviour.
How can you have the government's behaviour towards its citizens overseen by the government?

 

[Mottie]

The nasty party is talking about it...

So they should be.

"Simon Clarke, the former cabinet minister, said it was “completely right” to consider withdrawal. “It is a fundamental question of trust and competence that we should very significantly curb illegal immigration into the UK. We hear a great deal about how the UK played a key role in drawing up the convention, but the issues now being litigated under the ECHR were not in contemplation post world war II. Our human rights architecture is being abused by criminals to endanger the lives of desperate people".

In other words, those do-gooder solicitors and organisations have shot themselves in the foot with overstated cases of ‘uman rights. Poor Abdul has right to have the lamb in his lamb passanda bled to death by having its throat cut and not be humanely slaughtered. blah blah blah.

 

[Roy Bloom]

In other words, those do-gooder solicitors and organisations have shot themselves in the foot with overstated cases of ‘uman rights. Poor Abdul has right to have the lamb in his lamb passanda bled to death by having its throat cut and not be humanely slaughtered. blah blah blah.

Islamophobia was rife in the Cabinet.
Simon Clarke was appointed by Boris.
Boris was a perfect example of islamophobia.
I suspect you recall his islamophobic comments in the papers.

 

[Roy Bloom]

You made my point perfectly- thanks.

No probs, you provided all the material.

 

[motorbiking]

With your supposed legal background, you should realise that if one treaty depends on another for a standard of behaviour, a withdrawal from the one invalidates the other.

Additionally, the ECHR is a protection for citizens from the government's behaviour.
How can you have the government's behaviour towards its citizens overseen by the government?

You’re starting from assumptions that are wrong.

We have an independent judiciary. No need for another independent judiciary on top.

 

[Deleted member 174758]

…while their claim for asylum is being considered...

The problem is that their asylum claims aren't being considered, which is why the backlog is getting worse. Funny thing is that other countries in Europe seem to do a lot better at this, so what's gone wrong here?

Frankly it would cost us all a lot less if asylum claims were dealt with quickly. Why don't the government do that? And while we are about it why not let claimants work while they waited for a decision - more workers, so better for the economy, surely?

 

[Roy Bloom]

You’re starting from assumptions that are wrong.

We have an independent judiciary. No need for another independent judiciary on top.

You have a short memory.

Ministers’ attacks on judges threaten UK democracy, warns new report​

Boris Johnson’s government has come under fire for its repeated and unwarranted attacks on judges, which could be undermining judicial independence and threatening UK democracy.
...
The inquiry also reviewed all of the Supreme Court’s public law decisions since 2020, finding that “the high number of instances in which the Supreme Court has reversed its previous position on the law, so as to adopt an approach that is more favourable to the executive, is notable”.

Ministers’ attacks on judges threaten democracy, says report

Government attacks risk giving the impression that the courts are being pressured to rule in Boris Johnson's favour

www.opendemocracy.net

The judiciary is obviously a hair's breadth away from ministerial pressure.

What happens to citizens rights when the judiciary falls completely under ministerial pressure?
Who you gonna call?

As someone with supposed legal training you appear nonchalant about the judiciary coming under ministerial presuure.

 

[motorbiking]

Just the rantings of a political blogger.

 

[Roy Bloom]

Just the rantings of a political blogger.

Just a blogger? What does he know?

Sam Fowles is a barrister, and lecturer in law at St Edmund Hall, University of Oxford.

Home

openDemocracy is an independent international media platform covering current affairs, ideas and culture. We seek to challenge power and encourage democratic debate

www.opendemocracy.net

Sam is a public lawyer with a particular interest in constitutional, administrative, information, and planning/environmental law, inquests, and public inquiries. He has appeared in many of the leading matters of recent years including Miller/Cherry v The Prime Minister, Hamilton v Post Office, and The Liberal Democrat Party/Scottish National Party v ITV. He has appeared at every level of tribunal, including the Supreme Court.

Dr Sam Fowles | Cornerstone Barristers

Sam is a public lawyer with a particular interest in constitutional, administrative, information, and planning/environmental law, inquests, and public inquiries.

cornerstonebarristers.com

 

[motorbiking]

indeed. Hence the articles he writes

 

[Roy Bloom]

indeed. Hence the articles he rights.

Not just a blogger then?