Thread by @stand_for_all

Consultation on the Human Rights Act has been published, and, from a cursory reading, it's even worse than previously thought. Seems designed to strip rights from people the government deems "unsuitable" and remove the last legal protections some have. 1/

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…

Just as a point, when you seem to complain the right not to be returned to a country where you face torture, right to a fair trial, and right not to be ripped from your family are barriers to your government's policies, you kind of have to start questioning those policies. 2/

The main focus of the consultation appears to be, as the government has widely publicised, a means by which to remove foreign national offenders. This raises several crucial points. 3/

Firstly, however you shake it, it means that the UK is saying that some rights apply only to nationals. When we are talking about human rights, as detailed by the international instruments to which the UK is currently a party, that means wholesale discrimination. 4/

Secondly, due to the already stringent restrictions in place, human rights law has become in certain cases they only failsafe against miscarriages of justice, for UK nationals as well as Foreign Nationals. 5/

Thirdly, the focus on effectively removing, in particular, the right to family and private life isn't just a measure against those the government as deemed unworthy of having these rights, it is a punishment against their whole family, including children. 6/

Throughout the consultation tries to demonstrate how it reconciles itself with its international obligations, yet it still fails to address the not insignificant matter that domestic law is trumped by international. 7/

That means should these changes be implemented there is very real risk of a two tier judicial system based not just on where you are born, but also how much money you have, because those who can afford to may still have recourse to have cases heard in Strasbourg for example. 8/

You can't believe that you deserve human rights but others don't. They aren't "human rights" at that point. When you start to play with them though, particularly in such a politicised manner as is being done here, you have to ask how confident you are you will never need them. 9/

How confident are you that you will never face a miscarriage of justice? How confident are you that the government will always side with you? How confident are you that your privacy and right to a family can never be challenged? 10/

If you can answer that you are totally confident on all those points then you are living in a fantasy world. If you can't, and you can't, then you have to recognise that for your rights to be protected they have to be protected for everyone, and this is an assault on them. 11/