![]() |
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Well finally someone has discovered Google.
The subject has been about the ECHR and how they work. Believe it or not they don’t just apply to immigration. |
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Judge temporarily bans UK from completing deal to hand over Chagos Islands
Ministers had been expected to complete a deal that would have seen the UK hand over sovereignty of the archipelago to Mauritius in the coming hours. But in an emergency injunction granted early on Thursday, brought against the Foreign Office, Mr Justice Goose allowed "interim relief" to Bertrice Pompe, who had previously taken steps to bring legal action over the deal. Ms Pompe is a Chagossian woman who sees the deal as a betrayal of their rights. https://news.sky.com/story/judge-tem...lands-13372472 looks like starmers been goosed |
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
But, but, but…
AcTiV1sT JuDgES!!!! |
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Quote:
|
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Ms Pompe, who filed the application for interim relief, believes the British government is acting with disregard for the human rights of the Chagossian people.
She has argued completion of the deal would amount to a breach of the Human Rights Act and the Equality Act. Shame on Starmer wasn't he a human rights boff |
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Quote:
|
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Now that the party who favoured high immigration rates is out of power, net immigration has halved!
Quote:
|
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Quote:
|
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Quote:
https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2025/05/1.gifv The injunction was granted by Mr Justice Goose after a case was brought by two Chagossian women, represented by Michael Polak, who said the legal action was aimed at challenging the legitimacy of a handover agreement without formal consultation with the Chagossians. Michael Polak, according to his Chambers profile Quote:
|
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Quote:
But it isn't |
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Quote:
How many of the immigration cases are not ECHR related? Even within the Administrative Appeals Chamber, any ECHR issues tend to be immigration related. ---------- Post added at 13:03 ---------- Previous post was at 12:54 ---------- Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Quote:
|
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Quote:
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...n-human-rights Quote:
|
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
Quote:
|
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
As I understand Starmer's explanation for the Chagos deal, had we ignored the advisory ruling that Chagos belongs to Mauritius, then it would be further litigated until the UN formally declares Chagos as Mauritian. If that happens, then any assertion to the contrary by the UK would result in charges under international law. Starmer also said that we could be banned from using the military radio frequencies that would then belong to Mauritius.
I suppose I can accept that evaluation (as in beyond my ken to challenge it from the legal side). But it just goes to show how stacked the UN is and maybe something new needs to emerge - though I can't think what. It also comes to mind that countries such as USA, China, India, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey are not members of the ICC and thus beyond its reach. Could the UK not have withdrawn from the ICC? Or isn't it as simple as that? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 00:09. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum