4. As Raab unveils his (dreaded, dreadful) consultation today, I'll be revisiting 4 years of scholarly research/academic activism on Human Rights Act, which brought so many academics, legal professionals, NGOs and politicians together, to oppose encroachment of our human rights.
5. What happened to publication of the Independent Human Rights Act Review’s report? @DominicRaab rushing for the anti-HRA headlines before that report has seen the light of day?
And they outdid themselves this time: bringing anti-woke and anti-human rights narratives together
6. Dominic Raab's "narrow understanding of human rights goes hand in hand with nationalistic illusions of grandeur, if not sheer xenophobia".
"Ongoing metamorphosis of right to life will attract the desperate and destitute from all over the world to Britain", wrote Raab in 2009!
7. About to discuss career destinations for 16-18 year olds (and mature students) interested in Law.
When we come to human rights, we'll probably have to tell them it's a fuzzy space moving in an unknown direction (for purely political reasons)! #HumanRightsDay#Raab@AdamWagner1
98 Tory MPs rebelled against Govt's plans for #Covid19UK certificates.
The same MPs (probably) that are pushing for repeal/overhaul/updating - name that what you will - of Human Rights Act.
And we are told we need to have confidence in our Executive, to protect our rights? #ECHR
10. UK Government "taking away control" of our human rights - Brexit will bulldoze over everything European. Next stop: the European Convention on Human Rights.
11. Great thread by @AdamWagner1 offering 1st interpretation of key elements in Govt's consultation on Human Rights Act. Taking away "rights of certain classes of individuals" one of the most controversial aspects
12. A world exclusive for the UK government, a historic first, to be seeking to introduce a (modern) Bill of Rights whose sole purpose is to restrict - and take away - rights (from certain groups of people). #ECHR#HumanRightsDay#HumanRightsAct#HumanRights
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
“Inadequate state action to combat climate change exacerbate[s] the risks of harmful consequences and subsequent threats for the enjoyment of human rights”
European Court of Human Rights: it is “a matter of fact that there are sufficiently reliable indications that anthropogenic climate change exists … States are aware of this and capable of taking measures to address it effectively”.
States’ “legal obligations” extend not only to “ those individuals currently alive” but also to “ future generations [which] are likely to bear an increasingly severe burden of the consequences of present, failure and omissions to combat climate change”.
Thanks @JoshuaRozenberg for sharing.Others already commented on Sir Peter Goss's views on the futility/counter-intuitiveness of Raab's BoR, and lack of evidence basis (which followed on not listening to expert evidence).I want to focus on Sir Peter's points on judicial dialogue🧵
2. His Review Panel (IHRAR) "was struck by the high regard in which the UK Courts and Judiciary are held by the ECtHR and the beneficial influence this has, both domestically and for the ECtHR".
3. The ECtHR has welcomed the “mature equilibrium” reached with UK Courts, which "neither means nor requires that UK Courts and the Strasbourg Court always agree", and which entails "mutual respect bringing mutual benefit".
Not quite @DailyMailUK's narrative, one would argue.
1/10 How to transform procedural rights from illusory safeguards to practical guarantees: by empowering those who need them the most, starting w/ stronger awareness. Great case study here:@EachOtherUK & @BIDdetention will turn 63 page legal guide into comic book (& need our help)
3/ As they note, "at any one time in the UK, there are around 2,000 people held in immigration removal centres across the UK" and "people held in immigration detention can be kept there for anything from a few days to years".
1. My new book – with the wonderful Prof Yvonne McDermott, on Judicial Independence Under Threat – is now out, and we could not be more grateful to all those who made it happen: @BritishAcademy_@OUPAcademic & our distinguished authors.
It includes foreword by late Brian Kerr!
2. We were thrilled when Lord Kerr agreed to participate in our 2018 @BritishAcademy_ conference (which provided the foundation for this volume). We were touched by the modesty, openness and kindness he had showed to us since then.
3. We have very fond memories of being in his company during the pre-conference dinner at the @TheInnerTemple (and remain to this day very thankful to the Inn too, for its warm support of our conference).
At @matrixchambers, with two of our students, and two of our Visiting Profs in panel, @JMPSimor KC and Schona Jolly KC @WomaninHavana, on the ‘Brexit Freedoms Bill’.
Jessica Simor starts by noticing how this Bill will result in a vast handover of power to the executive.
2. What is Law for? Law must strive to create legal certainty (and this Bill will achieve the exact opposite of that), @JMPSimor notes, and Sir Jonathan Jones KC, former Head of the Govt Legal Dept, reinforces the point in his speech.
3. This Bill will “set fire to legal certainty”, says @WomaninHavana, taking examples from Employment law and pointing how we continue to rely on EU law for critical parts of that, e.g. equal pay provisions that women have drawn upon.
3. Prof Ekins: "For the Human Rights Act invites lawyers, individuals and lobby groups who are unhappy with government policies to try to undermine them by mounting challenges in the courts."
And this is wrong in a liberal democracy why exactly? #ECHR#humanrights@coe