I was privileged to act for EHRC in HJ v Iran . The SC accepted the EHRC's submission that one's sexuality is integral to one's identity & hiding it to avoid persecution amounts to a fear persecution. 1/ supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uks…

https://twitter.com/BenPBradshaw/status/1706549259871330673

Persecution has a specific meaning, which is properly applied by the UK Courts. It is not the same as discrimination and never has been (see last tweet in thread for Lord Hope on this).

There are two barristers promoting the idea that the PoC was not fair because it did not meet the same standards as a judicial body. This is to miss the key point that the PoC is not a court; it is not applying legislation enacted by Parliament & applicable to everyone. 1/ It is Parliament acting as a sovereign body, controlling the conduct of its own members according to its own rules & standards. That is its prerogative, which cannot be questioned in any court: Art 9 Bill of Rights. 2/

@mrjamesob The National Conservatism Conference is being held in London between 15-17 May: nationalconservatism.org/natcon-uk-2023/ @mrjamesob National Conservatism and the conference is supported by the Edmund Burke Foundation: nationalconservatism.org/people/
This seems essentially to be a US foundation.

This is an “Enemies of the People” statement by the Home Secretary and in breach of her duties as a Minister under s. 3 of the CRA 2005 & the Ministerial Code. Will the Lord Chancellor @DominicRaab discharge his statutory duty & hold her to account? legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/4/c…

This is a very good sign. The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill 2022 is both dangerous & deeply unserious - frivolous even (naive if one's being kind). Performative law making that is likely to cause chaos and yet more unforced errors.

https://twitter.com/GeorgeWParker/status/1585526567916244992

EU law became part of domestic law from 1973 by virtue of Parliament enacting the EC Act 1972. Technically, there was from that date no such thing as "EU law". That term remained, however, as a shorthand to delineate the applicable legal rules, both procedural and substantive.

Client to defence sols, after having paid his fixed penalty notice for attending parties: “but what do we do now that MPs have decided unanimously to ask the Standards Committee to investigate?” Solicitors: “Well, we could commission a legal opinion to show that the whole process is unfair? It would need to be by a big name - someone like Pannick. Then we leak and release it. Daily Mail follows with hit job on committee?”

On 23 February the EU imposed sanctions on members of Putin's government, including the Defence Minister (Council Dec. 2022/265), as well as on the entire Duma (Council Dec.2022/267). More people & entities were added in Decisions on 25, 28 Feb and 2 March:eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec/2014/1… Sanctions include the enclosed: eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/…. The Decision which that amends is here: eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/…

The PM's approach to the current crisis is exactly the same as Frost's approach to the NI Protocol. All their lives these people have climbed the ladder through bullying rather than merit. This is so often how the British establishment works. 1/4 People keep their heads down and let the bullies rise. They then have to cow-tow to them to move further up the ladder themselves. Very few speak out and when someone does, the others do not support them - they keep their heads down. 2/4

Patterson is the personification of a Brextremist approach to the world. Whatever the harm to the greater good, the most important thing is one’s own feelings. All will be sacrificed at the altar of self. 1/4 By all means amend a process but not in the middle of it - ie because you dislike the result. Bodes ill for Raab’s threat to overturn Court judgments when HMG dislikes them. 2/4

@DominicRaab is generating another false narrative; that ‘foreign judges’ in Strasbourg rule over us - they don’t. Parliament decided how influential ECHR judgments should be and in the Human Rights Act provided that they should be persuasive but not binding.

https://twitter.com/SirJJQC/status/1449637002379415553

The reason Parliament did that was so people under UK authority and control (jurisdiction) could get their rights upheld by British judges and NOT have to go to Strasbourg.

Alexa, define impartiality.

Gibb is a Brextremist and a devoted Tory. He was at least in part responsible as BBC head of politics for securing Brexit. Without exception his criticisms of BBC journalists for not being impartial have been when he disagreed with views expressed.

https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1387739195641315330

See also: theguardian.com/media/2020/apr…

Why did the Government refuse the offer from the European Commission to extend transition up to two years to deal with pandemic and enable sufficient time for companies and hauliers to adapt? 1/ Why did it reach a deal only days before it came into effect allowing no time for business adaptation? 2/

Much atttention has been paid to the fact that the Internal Market Bill puts the UK in breach of international law. It also however, raises extremely serious questions of domestic law with far reaching implications outside of this specific legislative context.#internalmarketsbill Clauses 42, 43 and 45(2) allow Ministers to adopt regulations in respect of controls on NI-GB imports & state aid, allowing Ministers to disapply any domestic law or remedy. The far reaching nature of these enabling clauses is extraordinary. Let us consider some hypotheticals:

This is a fascinating read (albeit a university essay in structure and style) - much of it written by Cummings no doubt. If only we knew nothing of its authors, it might fill one with hope. That said, the saving souls bit is a step too far (& the’people’s govt ‘, Soviet sinister)

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1277154897725739008

Because of what we know about recent government spending: shipping company with no ships, pesticide company supplying masks, dodgy non-existent contract for masks from Turkey, contract for failed app, purchase of dodgy satellite company etc etc etc, this does not bode well.

Benn Act avoidance thread: Cummings to @lewis_goodall said: "we will see what the law is on 19 October". Andrew Mitchell this morning on @mattfrei said PM should use any legislative or Parliamentary mechanism to get no deal through. But no one will say what they are planning. 1/8 Four mechanisms raised so far: 1. Major said PM might make an Order of Council to postpone the coming into force of the Benn Act so as to render it nugatory 2. Grieve suggested they may be whipping up unrest in order to declare state of emergency under Civil Contingencies Act 2/8

The State has three arms: the executive (government), legislature (Parliament) and judiciary (Courts) Only if all three can function effectively do we have democracy. 1/8 The State has three arms: the executive (government), legislature (Parliament) and judiciary (Courts) Only if all three can function effectively do we have democracy. 1/10

@TheIndGroup @LibDems A couple of thoughts on 'splitting the vote'. Each candidate fighting has a budget, a voice and access to media etc. The more remain candidates therefore, potentially the greater is remain's reach. and louder its voice 1/4 Brexit has 3-4 parties and therefore around 300 MEP candidates. This gives that argument a very large budget and loud voice.
Remain has: Greens, Libdems, SNP, Plaid and ChangeUK. That enables it to spend & spread the word more powerfully than if there was a single grouping. 2/4

A fantastic day organised by @HenryCPorter and others; @lara_spirit and @maryftz for hosting. So many people to thank. I chaired a great panel on the hugely important issue of freedom of movement @SebDance Jane Dyball, @bellafrimpong Laura Shields @mediawhizz . A few thoughts. 1

https://twitter.com/yeoldemother/status/1083861871856369664

We know that immigration was a driver of the vote to leave, whether due to perception, actual experience or lies, e.g. re-Turkey. The public is now however, waking up in ever increasing numbers (74% now in favour) to the fact that what was really at issue was free movement. 2/

@AndrewMarr9 @MarrShow - you will recall about a year ago mentioning a letter I wrote to the PM asking her to disclose the advice she had received that Article 50 was unilaterally revocable. She refused to do so and paid 5 QCs to try and stop the ECJ ruling on the point. Why? Please ask her why she would prefer to risk people's lives, stockpile food, send 1000 police to Northern Ireland, spend millions on fridges rather than revoke Article 50? Please ask her how badly no deal compares with remaining in the EU?

Note that the Electoral Commission only opened its investigation into 'Better for the Country'- Arron Banks' outfit - after @GoodLawProject issued judicial review proceedings against it concerning decision to close its investigation into Vote Leave on 24 October 17 1/

https://twitter.com/AlbertoNardelli/status/1058135218060713984

In that claim @GoodLawProject noted the failure of the Electoral Commission to make the relevant connections - see image.
electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journal…