I have just emerged from a long desk day advising on the law of the land to discover it has been a shameful day for law, and the rule of law, in the UK.
Something is rotten in any state that promotes this.
And one doesn’t get credit for breaking just a little bit of the law.
And you can take that also from a former Lord Chancellor.
Struggling to close my jaw as I catch up on today’s developments faultlining where law meets politics.
So the govt is prepared to break international law to achieve its ends, having sold the country there was a done deal, a brilliant deal that it now wants to unravel.
Are there actually no limits to what this government’s Brexit will break in our country?
Quite apart from boxing themselves into a corner over this, and irrespective of whether they actually intend to violate #internationallaw, the damage this is doing to our international reputation is not to be underestimated.
As an aside, it’s a strange week to be writing a book chapter about the rule of law in modern democracies in the 21st century.
Britain has much to be proud of on its record on the rule of law.
I hope the government listens to & respects the significant voices of protest, which come from essential traditions, codes & stability which govern our modern state and strengthen our society.
A quick general thread about what to expect and understand the ICJ judgment on South Africa's request for provisional measures against Israel, at 12pm UK time today, which you can watch live . A few things to watch out for. /1icj-cij.org/sites/default/…
First, we need to be clear about what the Court is doing today. It is NOT making a definitive finding that there has or has not been genocide. It is being asked by South Africa to make provisional orders, which you could liken to an emergency injunction. /2
The Court will award provisional measures only if it considers that there is a plausible risk of genocide, and that the situatio. urgently requires such measures. SA gave many examples of the Court's own such orders in the past. /3
Two specific allegations: war crime of unlawful deportation of population (children) & unlawful transfer of population (children) from occupied areas of Ukraine to Russian Federation (Arts 8(2)(a)(vii) and 8(2)(b)(viii) of Rome Statute).
ICC: reasonable grounds to believe Putin bears individual criminal responsibility (i) for having committed the acts directly, jointly with others &/or through others & (ii) for his failure to exercise control properly over civilian & military subordinates who committed the acts..
.. and who were under his effective authority and control, pursuant to superior responsibility.
In sending that tweet*, & not backing down, @GaryLineker sought to stand up for vulnerable, voiceless people & unwittingly unleashed a roar of support.
Don’t lose that focus on Monday, when the govt puts the shocking, inhumane & unworkable illegal Migration Bill before Plmnt.
*whether you agree with his analogy or not.
A clear & useful @instituteforgov analysis and set of Qs MPs & media should be requiring the government to answer.
It’s wild reading British news headlines from abroad. A govt not talking to crucial sectors on strike, people barely managing a cost of living crisis, Brexit costs unacknowledged, so too climate crisis, but govt wants to whip up fury about small boats & leave ECHR yet again.
These politically unstable years since the referendum have done a lot of damage - with Britain on one hand rightly damning violations of international law by states including Russia and China, but itself making wrecking ball threats which jeopardise & may weaken those same norms.
This “pick and mix” approach to law isn’t just reflected internationally, but also domestically. Tomorrow, as the Lords debate #REULBill, we have another example of a govt playing fast and loose with the frameworks and stability of law. It’s a dangerous game. With consequences.
And just like that, #GlobalBritain becomes the next Brexit catchphrase to bite the dust. This news that the UK formally is to downgrade its longstanding commitment to human rights for close diplomatic ties is a real blow. Soft power has always mattered. theguardian.com/politics/2022/…
Hoping for a strong and principled response from opposition parties on the govt’s reported foreign policy intention to drop the UK’s long-standing commitment to human rights for close diplomatic ties.
Pragmatism has always been a bedrock of foreign policy. But my own experience of British diplomacy around the world has been that the values, language & culture of human rights often have been played an important role, even if not always as central as human rights advocates wish.