| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Repl | |
| Posted by: | Steven Rose | |
| Date/Time: | 08/03/26 21:45:00 |
| Philippe Sands remarked that there are currently no cases pending against the UK at the European Court of Human Rights, implying that the furore over the Convention on Human Rights is entirely misplaced and indeed confected. This is disingenuous. The fact is that British courts have been conditioned to comply in advance with extreme interpretations of Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention on freedom from torture and the right to family life given by activist European judges. The result is that it is now almost impossible to deport illegal migrants or foreign criminals who appeal on the basis that their human rights would be undermined by deportation. For example, one criminal escaped deportation by arguing that French prison cells are smaller than British ones, so deportation to France would amount to torture. Another successfully argued that if he were deported to Albania he would be deprived of the right to family life because his child wanted to stay in England where he could eat chicken nuggets. Even Keir Starmer recognises that this is a problem, which is why that he has proposed disapplying or modifying certain provisions of the Convention. Yet Philippe Sands glossed over this issue. Opinion polls consistently show that illegal immigration is an important issue for voters. It is dangerous to assume that the opinions of politically motivated judges in Geneva should take precedence over the wishes of the British people. |