Conclusion of JCHR finds pushbacks are contrary to UK law and International maritime law

[Notch7]

Conclusions and recommendations by Human Rights Joint Committee

1) A policy of pushbacks fails to comply with the obligations to save those in distress, contrary to the right to life and international maritime law

2) Pushbacks would create a situation where state actors were actively placing individuals in situations that would increase the risk to life.

3) Under the current conditions, we cannot see how a policy of pushbacks can be implemented without risking lives, contrary to the UK’s obligations under the right to life and international maritime law

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt5802/jtselect/jtrights/885/88513.htm

 

[Notch7]

 

[Highway Man]

Nobody cares about these silly laws, it is due to all change soon enough. Also this is not the law as it stands, this is a parliament discussion around the subject.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

Nobody cares about these silly laws, it is due to all change soon enough. Also this is not the law as it stands, this is a parliament discussion around the subject.

You need to learn about Parliamentary process.
The paper presented by Notch is from the;-

Human Rights (Joint Committee)​

And what do committees do in Parliament?
In Parliament, committees, particularly select committees, play a crucial role in scrutinizing government activity and policy. They investigate specific issues in detail, gather evidence, and produce reports with recommendations, influencing government decisions. These committees also allow members to build expertise in specific policy areas and contribute to public discussion and debate.

That's the problem with being educated in the Army, you gain a very limited and narrow focus and horizon.

 

[Highway Man]

You need to learn about Parliamentary process.
The paper presented by Notch is from the;-

Human Rights (Joint Committee)​

And what do committees do in Parliament?
In Parliament, committees, particularly select committees, play a crucial role in scrutinizing government activity and policy. They investigate specific issues in detail, gather evidence, and produce reports with recommendations, influencing government decisions. These committees also allow members to build expertise in specific policy areas and contribute to public discussion and debate.

That's the problem with being educated in the Army, you gain a very limited and narrow focus and horizon.

yeah we was really big on human rights in the army.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

yeah we was really big on human rights in the army.

As shown by the investigation into Human Rights abuses.

 

[Highway Man]

As shown by the investigation into Human Rights abuses.

It's not for everyone

 

[Deleted member 323070]

It's not for everyone

Gang culture.

 

[MNW67]

Conclusions and recommendations by Human Rights Joint Committee

Very interesting, thanks.

This stood out:

21.As previously recognised, the primary obligation in respect of those at sea must be safety of life. This is even more so when dealing with people on small, unseaworthy vessels, in a busy shipping lane, often with rough waters, as is the case for migrants in small boats in the Channel. A policy of pushbacks would risk failing to comply with the obligations to save those in distress at sea, and instead would risk a situation where state actors were actively placing individuals in situations that would have an increased risk to life. We cannot see how a policy of pushbacks can be implemented without risking lives, contrary to the UK’s obligations under the right to life and international maritime law, especially if applied to fragile unseaworthy vessels.

 

[Highway Man]

Very interesting, thanks.

This stood out:

There were a lot of people saying the opposite too.

 

[Highway Man]

Gang culture.

errmm its the army? Not really like hells angels or something.

 

[motorbiking]

Conclusions and recommendations by Human Rights Joint Committee

1) A policy of pushbacks fails to comply with the obligations to save those in distress, contrary to the right to life and international maritime law

2) Pushbacks would create a situation where state actors were actively placing individuals in situations that would increase the risk to life.

3) Under the current conditions, we cannot see how a policy of pushbacks can be implemented without risking lives, contrary to the UK’s obligations under the right to life and international maritime law

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt5802/jtselect/jtrights/885/88513.htm

Nobody would disagree with this as a policy. Unfortunately, its not happening.

3.The right to life is inherently engaged when people cross the Channel—a busy shipping lane, often with rough waters—in small unseaworthy vessels. This engages the responsibility of the State from which such boats embark to have taken reasonable measures to prevent people coming to harm at sea, for example by establishing a legal and operational framework to safeguard lives at sea, including by ensuring the seaworthiness of vessels, and by establishing systems to rescue anyone in distress within their search and rescue areas. Part of this includes taking reasonable measures to prevent people placing themselves (and others) in life-endangering situations, as well as to take enforcement action against those involved in human trafficking or slavery. It also engages the responsibility of any other States within whose territorial waters or search and rescue areas such boats pass to take reasonable action to save lives. (Paragraph 53)

Unfortunately, no such power exists. It would be good if it did, because it would allow the UK and or France to contract SARs vessels to prevent them leaving French shores under the the argument that they are putting other's lives at risk.

There is no law enabling this.

The article is nothing more than recommendations.

 

[Deluks]

The people putting themselves into boats are putting their own lives at risk, and expect other people to risk their lives to save them...the sense of entitlement!

 

[motorbiking]

Organised criminal enjoying the support of the likes of charities providing life jackets and rescuing them.

 

[MNW67]

The people putting themselves into boats are putting their own lives at risk, and expect other people to risk their lives to save them...the sense of entitlement!

It's a funny old business, no doubt about it. How on earth did we end up like this!