I wrote this 10 years ago about the false "cat prevented deportation" story - the story is still false theguardian.com/law/2011/oct/0…
If, in the space of 10 years, politicians haven't been able to find other *true* cases to beat the Human Rights Act with, perhaps the reason is there aren't any.
Human rights laws have been hugely important in the UK and a source of real progress for many different parts of the society. I helped made this a few years ago to highlight 50 examples eachother.org.uk/50-human-right…
If any politicians are finding it difficult to know what to do about the Human Rights Act, I and @yo_segal made a film for @EachOtherUK which explains it in 2 minutes
Incidentally, that little animation (by @cubstudio) has been watched over 750,000 times on YouTube
You can also see infographics on each of the rights in the Human Rights Act here. Free to use, print and share! via @EachOtherUK eachother.org.uk/infographics/
Follow @EachOtherUK for much more of this over the coming months

• • •

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

Keep Current with Adam Wagner

Adam Wagner 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 @AdamWagner1

8 Dec
I still think that the reason the Prime Minister continues to deny a "party" took place is that if he does there is a risk he is exposing the attendees to possible criminal sanctions.
There have been endless discussions on the legality of the party, and there are some potential issues around applicability of the regulations, but if I was advising Downing St (as I assume the AG has) I would advise there is a real risk of prosecution.
If the regulations applied, the key question for the police would probably be whether the party was "reasonably necessary for work".

If the Prime Minister describes it as a "party" that means the answer to the question if highly likely to be "no".
Read 8 tweets
8 Dec
I spoke to @maitlis @BBCNewsnight about the Downing Street party and any potential legal implications. From 6:45 (sorry about the mute! 😳) bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episod…
As I said in the interview, I think Downing Street are in a genuine bind. If they “come clean“ and admit there was a party, they are potentially admitting criminal offences (nobody can be sure yet if the law was broken). If they don’t, the political implications are severe.
They will also know that in the coming weeks they need public trust to impose further restrictions. People are thinking about next ones but the current ones, particularly requiring isolation for anyone coming into contact with Omicron, may be about to impact hundreds of thousands
Read 6 tweets
6 Dec
🚨 New travel regulations in force tomorrow 4am - brings back requirement to possess a negative test upon entry to England

The Health Protection (Coronavirus, International Travel and Operator Liability) (England) (Amendment) (No. 23) Regulations 2021

legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2021/1371…
Explanatory note
Here's the bit about possessing a negative test
Read 4 tweets
6 Dec
I initially thought I disagreed, because of the "permitted organised gatherings" requiring a risk assessment, but then Matthew pointed out (and I remembered from the time) that weirdly indoor gatherings didn't require one
But, as Matthew points out, if the gathering was a "permitted organised gathering", the individuals who were invited would not be allowed to mingle outside their households. If they did, they would be breaking the law. So in a way that makes the potential law breaches of...
Read 6 tweets
6 Dec
Update: there was no party
“It was not a party” update:
- cheese and wine
- not socially distanced
- “business meeting”

I know I mentioned this before but this keeps bringing back the utter distress of my 7 student clients who got £10,000 fixed penalty notices for house parties. Families paying life changing £ they couldn't afford, regulators + student authorities disciplinary processes triggered
Read 8 tweets
5 Dec
Yes there is no legal issue with bringing prosecutions - or giving out fixed penalty notices - for something that happened a year ago. But the police have said before that they don't tend to look retrospectively at Covid offences... (1/2)
... but I know from my own work that police definitely do retrospectively investigate Covid offences, e.g. I had a client who allegedly escaped hotel quarantine who was investigated afterwards. It's discretionary (2/2)
I think, to be fair to the Met, there is a public interest point in putting Covid issues behind us and not encouraging thousands of "neighbour on neighbour" complaints about lockdown. But surely the public interest balance is different for alleged offences by government officials
Read 6 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

Too expensive? 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 on Twitter!

:(