The clergy have decided to meddle in temporal matters today, specifically the #InternalMarketBill with some Good Friday Agreement grifting thrown in for good measure.
Unfortunately for them the bill in questions doesn’t support such claims.
/1
#Brexit
Unfortunately for them the bill in questions doesn’t support such claims.
/1
#Brexit
https://twitter.com/justinwelby/status/1318105356262887424
The specific bit of the GFA they claim is under threat by the #InternalMarketBill is s 6(2) committing the government to incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights into #NorthernIreland law which was subsequently done via the Human Rights Act 1998
/2
#Brexit
/2
#Brexit
The portion of the #InternalMarketBill they appear to be referring to is Clause 47 that clarifies regulations set under Clauses 44 & 45 that pertain mainly to goods movements & state aid.
/3
#Brexit
/3
#Brexit
The Human Rights Act is referenced in s 2(a) as well as s 3 of Clause 47 with the implications outlined in s 4
/4
#Brexit
/4
#Brexit
In s 2(a) it says that regulations under Clauses 44(1) & 45(1)can’t be regarded as unlawful under any “relevant international or domestic law” (I’ll come back to that) & specifically cites that s 6(1) of the Human Rights Act does not apply.
/5
#Brexit
/5
#Brexit
s 3 “gold plates” the primacy of any regulations made under Clauses 44(1) & 45(1) referencing s 21(1) of the Human Rights Act & s 4 prohibits any legal challenges on the grounds of any such regulations being unlawful.
/6
#Brexit
/6
#Brexit
As I alluded to earlier any regulations made under Clauses 44(1) & 45(1) “have effect notwithstanding any relevant international or 35 domestic law” but what does that mean?
/7
#Brexit
/7
#Brexit
Fortunately this is defined later in s 8 of Clause 47 where it specifically says that the Convention Rights referenced in s 1(1) of the Human Rights Act are not covered by the definition of a “relevant domestic of international law”
/8
#Brexit
/8
#Brexit
So what does all of this mean?
Basically that all regulations made under the aforementioned parts of the #InternalMarketBill can’t be considered unlawful & cant be challenged in court on those or BS Human Rights grounds (bc the Convention Rights are specifically excepted)
/9
Basically that all regulations made under the aforementioned parts of the #InternalMarketBill can’t be considered unlawful & cant be challenged in court on those or BS Human Rights grounds (bc the Convention Rights are specifically excepted)
/9
So for example a minister couldn’t make a regulation under Clause 44(1) that removed the requirement for export declarations & reintroduced the death penalty as the latter would be unlawful because it would go against the ECHR conventions rights.
/10
#Brexit
/10
#Brexit
In my worthless & grotesquely unqualified legal opinion @JustinWelby is engaging in nothing but groundless partisan fear mongering & merely giving succour to those already that use and abuse the Good Friday Agreement for their own narrow political ends.
/11
#Brexit
/11
#Brexit
Despite the efforts of Most Reverend Archbishop to insinuate otherwise the ECHR Convention Rights are untouched by the #InternalMarketBill & the Good Friday Agreement remains unmolested.
/12
#Brexit
/12
#Brexit
I’d expect a lot more from the head of the established church, perhaps it’s best he sticks to his core text & pay particular attention to Exodus Chapter 23 Verse 1
“Thou shall not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness”
/13
#Brexit
“Thou shall not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness”
/13
#Brexit
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
