- Dec 22, 2003
What a lying cunt. The ECHR hasn't done anything - but it does, rightly, loom over our supreme court. And the very last sentence he said:Our Supreme Court is a foreign court now?
Fighting for the rights of migrants and the under-represented was exactly what the ECHR, which we helped setup on the back of atrocities by european governments, was designed to do. And because the UK is turning increasingly scummy, and wanting to do dubious things, that the ECHR is pulling us up.I do not believe that the purpose of the european convention of human rights was to stop a soveriegn parliament from moving illegal migrants to a country deemed to be safe in parliamentary statute and binding international law
It's the desire to paint migrants as "illegal" that's the problem here - because there's no legal way the UK can do it without exiting all sorts of conventions and basically becoming an even more scummy country.
"Illegal Migrants" - they need to be processed in line with international agreements we signed up to before they can be deemed illegal. So this is weasel words.
"safe" in parliamentary statute. Currently it's the UN which deems what country is safe (not ECHR). If Parliament labels Rawanda safe it's officially exiting the agreement we entered into where the UN decides on the status of a country and it still puts itself on a warpath with the ECHR because the ECHR can point out that our new law breaks our own agreements and therefore effectively nullify it.
But emergency legislation @Tom - they can push that through very quickly. Easily before the next general election.
I'd be amazed if they did anything about our compliance with the ECHR - that's just bluster. They'll kick the can down the road by deeming Rawanda "safe" and then one of the rights groups will appeal to the ECHR down the line (after another round that goes to the UK supreme court). At which point it'll be Labour's decision whether to exit from the ECHR. And the Tories can then blame Labour for allowing the boats to keep coming.