Read on Twitter
Repeating some of my thoughts on the #IllegalMigrationBill as it begins its House of Lords stages. It is undoubtedly designed to reduce human rights protections for migrants, disapplying aspects of the Human Rights Act … /1
The government accepts the Bill may well breach a whole toxic soup of ECHR rights (life, torture, slavery, fair trial, detention, family & private life, discrimination, right to a remedy) /2
It makes it more difficult, or impossible, for claimants to challenge decisions or enforce their rights in the UK courts. Thus the likelihood is that more cases will go to the ECtHR in Strasbourg, setting up the risk of a clash there /3
The UNHCR says the Bill is a "clear breach" of the Refugee Convention. It also expressly disapplies domestic legal protections against modern slavery /4
What the Bill doesn’t and can’t do: disapply the UK’s obligations under the ECHR and the Refugee Convention under *international law* /5
Nor - because legislation is not a magic wand 🪄- can the Bill conjure up resources to take quicker, more effective decisions; or suitable facilities to detain people; or countries to remove them to; or planes to put them on /6
Sadly what it can do is damage the UK's reputation as a place that respects the rule of law, abides by its international obligations, and enables people to enforce their rights before (truly) world-class independent courts /7
As @RobertBuckland put it, the Bill risks harming our international reputation “as reasonable actors & people with whom other countries can do business & ... a place where people will want to invest". I hope the House of Lords will address these problems. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
