OMG Human Rights Lawyers Again

[Notch7]

I never mentioned reasons. I said it had changed and provided evidence. SImple

data is meaningless without context

Looks like there's only one of us who didn't read the article, and it's not me

oh dear it seems you cant read

"Speaking for myself, I am far from convinced that there was less danger and repression in previous decades compared to today."

"Our awareness of the issues they face and the available evidence may have changed, though. As might, therefore, the awareness of officials and judges."

 

[Doist]

I am not sure which proposal that is!

Nigel Farage has a new 'leave' campaign - here's how it could work and how it might impact you

Not content with Britain having left the EU, Nigel Farage now wants to see the country leave the European Convention on Human Rights. But what even is it, how could we actually leave, and how would our rights be impacted? Sky News explains.

news.sky.com

Yes, it boils down to storming out of the already mentioned ECHR, as that would give "freedoms" previously unseen in Britain!

 

[MNW67]

Nigel Farage has a new 'leave' campaign - here's how it could work and how it might impact you

Not content with Britain having left the EU, Nigel Farage now wants to see the country leave the European Convention on Human Rights. But what even is it, how could we actually leave, and how would our rights be impacted? Sky News explains.

news.sky.com

Yes, it boils down to storming out of the already mentioned ECHR, as that would give "freedoms" previously unseen in Britain!

Yes, I was aware of those proposals. I thought you were hinting that there might be an even more radical proposal to change the judicial system so that immigrants wouldn't have the right to defend themselves in court at all, even in criminal proceedings!

So, as regards Farage's proposal. We would leave the ECHR, the UN Convention Against Torture, the Refugee Convention, and the anti human trafficking convention. And then he would bring in a new bill of rights which would only cover UK citizens. But immigrants would still have access to the normal criminal and civil court systems for everyday matters.

 

[Notch7]

Nigel Farage has a new 'leave' campaign - here's how it could work and how it might impact you

Not content with Britain having left the EU, Nigel Farage now wants to see the country leave the European Convention on Human Rights. But what even is it, how could we actually leave, and how would our rights be impacted? Sky News explains.

news.sky.com

Yes, it boils down to storming out of the already mentioned ECHR, as that would give "freedoms" previously unseen in Britain!

yeah freedom for the government to exploit the people

 

[Notch7]

googles it and then pastes it claiming knowledge.

yes it is what you do

 

[Si_]

data is meaningless without context

Self evidently untrue. If you're standing in a room that's filling with water you don't need to know why it's filling up, only that it is and you need to get out.

Fact: The percentage number of claims accepted increased by 1400% in 30 years (and peaked in 2022 with an increase of 1900%)

Here's another fact: More immigrants settled in his country in the three years between 2020 and 2023 than in the one thousand years prior to 1950.

 

[Doist]

Yes, I was aware of those proposals. I thought you were hinting that there might be an even more radical proposal to change the judicial system so that immigrants wouldn't have the right to defend themselves in court at all, even in criminal proceedings!

So, as regards Farage's proposal. We would leave the ECHR, the UN Convention Against Torture, the Refugee Convention, and the anti human trafficking convention. And then he would bring in a new bill of rights which would only cover UK citizens. But immigrants would still have access to the normal criminal and civil court systems for everyday matters.

Look, the debate right now is not about what legal immigrants should have or should not have access to. The whole idea Farage pedals is to not give the immigrants who haven't proven yet they are legally allowed to stay (and they can do that because UK is member of ECHR) the opportunity to do so!

If you give these people no chance to prove because you just think they are lying, clearly they won't be able to and will have to leave because the lawyers won't be able to rely on the ECHR.

 

[MNW67]

Look, the debate right now is not about what legal immigrants should have or should not have access to. The whole idea Farage pedals is to not give the immigrants who haven't proven yet they are legally allowed to stay (and they can do that because UK is member of ECHR) the opportunity to do so!

If you give these people no chance to prove because you just think they are lying, clearly they won't be able to and will have to leave because the lawyers won't be able to rely on the ECHR.

I was just trying to clarify what your initial post meant. It was rather vague!

I think it's the politics that 99% of people are interested in, so no wonder

Speaking of which, I still can't see how Mr Farage is going to abolish the basic immigrant right of defending themselves in the court without looking like a neo-Nazi.

Now waiting for the ****storm in the comments hehe ))

As regards illegal immigration, you are correct. Under Farage's proposals, every illegal immigrant will be returned, even to countries where they will be tortured, and even if they are victims of human trafficking. They will have no recourse to any of the treaties I mentioned above, because we would be leaving them. None will be allowed to apply for asylum or any other sort of protection.

 

[Knave of Hearts]

... None will be allowed to apply for asylum or any other sort of protection.

Hence my initial comment.

“Let the jury consider their verdict,” the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.
“No, no!” said the Queen. “Sentence first—verdict afterwards.”
“Stuff and nonsense!” said Alice loudly. “The idea of having the sentence first!”
Alice in Wonderland by Charles Dickens

It's an often used quote to ridicule the arbitrariness of a decision or policy.

Quite fitting for the debacle discussed.

 

[MNW67]

Hence my initial comment.

I have to ask. Why Charles Dickens? I thought it was a joke the first time.

 

[SPLINE]

Never forget that Starmer is a lefty lawyer, as were Blair and his wife. These people have lived on our taxes, spending it on foreigners and criminals and making us poorer, divided and less secure.

 

[transam]

Well this deal all went pear shaped
Bit like the Rwanda caper

Starmer is not having a good month

Things can only get better ?? Perhaps Donald will get him out the s*** ??

May need some brown nosing though

 

[pete01]

Things can only get better ??

Theres a song in that somewhere

 

[Highway Man]

Theres a song in that somewhere

 

[pete01]

OMG theres already a song?? I was just writing one...pppfffttt