David Anderson Profile picture
Mar 25, 2020 8 tweets 3 min read Read on X
Delighted that the amendments to the #CoronavirusBill promoted by @SarahLudford and me (on the provision of meaningful information to Parliament, and confirming full compliance with the Human Rights Act 1998) bore fruit this afternoon ... /1
... in the form not of changes to the Bill, which the timetable was never going to permit, but of positive ministerial statements by Earl Howe and Lord Bethell (Hansard, when it catches up, will be here hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2020-03-…). /2
On the need to give Parliament proper information, my speech is here hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2020-03-… and the Minister's response here parliamentlive.tv/event/index/71…. /3
The Minister committed the Government to providing "evidence and explanations to justify the conclusions set out in the 2-monthly reports": this goes well beyond the requirements of clause 97. Special thanks to @BinghamCentre for suggesting this point to me. /4
On human rights and equality, my short intervention (emphatically supported by Lord Falconer) is here parliamentlive.tv/event/index/71…, and the Minister's response is here parliamentlive.tv/event/index/71…. /5
He confirmed that our human rights laws, international and domestic, will continue to speak without derogation or curtailment through this emergency: "The HRA 1998 gives full effect to the rights and freedoms in the ECHR. Nothing in this Bill contradicts that." /6
It is good that the world should know that however strong our reaction to Covid-19, we have definitively not abandoned the rule of law. /7
These are small consolations in the context of a profoundly troubling (if necessary) Bill, but any gains are valuable in the circumstances. That's me done for a while - stay safe everyone. /8

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with David Anderson

David Anderson Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @bricksilk

Jun 30, 2023
My independent review of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 is published today. The Act generally works well, but my review examines some specific proposals for change. .gov.uk/government/pub…
Govt announcement here gov.uk/government/new…
A one-page summary of my #IPA2016 review is here. Tl;dr the Act has worked well so far, but an amending Bill should address some specific points and by 2030, technological change will require us to rewrite the vocabulary of surveillance and its oversight. https://t.co/ZmqH05jSpggov.uk/government/pub…
Read 4 tweets
Jun 28, 2023
The rule of law is an undefined statutory concept. Lord Keen, who resigned over the “limited and specific” breach of international law in #IMA2021, and I sought clarity from our Law Officers in @HLConstitution https://t.co/aK3jpkk2ZL (0905:45-0920:15)./1Parliamentlive.tv
parliamentlive.tv/event/index/5b…
There are well-established international definitions by the CoE Venice Commission and the EU (whose conditionality regulation of 2020 was the subject of a 25-judge ruling recently). So it would not be impossible to arrive at our own definition. /2
But it is clear from the Law Officers’ replies this morning that there is no common view within government, even though differences in relation to the issue of international law may have been pragmatically resolved. /3
Read 8 tweets
Dec 1, 2022
I've been looking at the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme, added in its current form to the #NationalSecurityBill on the last day of its passage through the Commons. No html version available yet but it's Part 3 (ss 62-81) of the Bill: bills.parliament.uk/publications/4…. /1
I think I understand why the activities of specified persons (e.g. China, Russia, Iran and entities they control) need to be registered (cll 62-65). Hostile states need careful watching and hopefully this (and the penalties for non-compliance) will help. /2
Less obvious is why ALL governments and ALL bodies incorporated outside the UK should be required to register "political influence activities" including contacting an MP or issuing public communications aimed at influencing UK government decisions (cll 66-70). /3
Read 15 tweets
Dec 1, 2022
The long-awaited Ouseley report into closed material proceedings has now been published. tl;dr - CMPs have enabled more cases to be tried, but special advocates need better resources.assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…
Most of the concerns expressed during the passage of the #JSA2013 are found not to have been realised in practice. But there are 20 practical recommendations for improvement of the system. /2
My own role in the genesis of #JSA2013 is summarised here daqc.co.uk/wp-content/upl…, at pp 416-418. /3
Read 4 tweets
Jun 13, 2022
The #NIProtocolBill is here, together with the claimed legal “justification” which is the doctrine of necessity. Sounds thin to me, not to say threadbare. gov.uk/government/new…
The Govt’s legal position is summarised here gov.uk/government/pub….
In short - necessity rarely excuses a breach, and only when (inter alia) the State’s act is the only way to safeguard an essential interest against a grave and imminent peril, and when no other essential interest is seriously impaired by the breach: jusmundi.com/en/document/wi…
Read 7 tweets
Apr 5, 2022
Useful 🧵 on today’s #CJEU Dwyer judgment - a notorious murder in Ireland that was only solved because location data was routinely saved for 2 yrs in case police needed access in a criminal investigation. /1
This enabled the crime to be pinned on a previously unsuspected architect, whose professional movements over a long period corresponded with those of the incriminating phone. /2
I was an expert witness in the case so will not comment further on a judgment that largely follows #CJEU precedent, whatever you think of it (other approaches are available: see #ECtHR). /3
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(