Liam

HR | ARU Alumni | LLM graduate ~ University of Leicester | Interests in Law, History & Human Rights | Coffee Enthusiast | Aspiring PhD student

[Virginia Mantouvalou @vmantouvalou]

Can workers lose their job because of social media posts? Do they have a right to strike or free speech?

This June, I teach an executive course @UCLLaws with @N_Countouris George Letsas and @colmocinneide where we’ll answer these questions and more.

https://t.co/2XoPjStttV

[Breaking Aviation News & Videos @aviationbrk]

Norse Atlantic Airways becomes the first airline ever to fly a 787 Dreamliner to Antarctica after flying from Cape Town, South Africa, down to Troll Research Station on the frozen continent.

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

Honestly, where on earth did the reference to the ECtHR come from?? They aren’t involved and when they did get involved they simply said wait for your domestic courts to rule on the policy. They did, and they said it’s unlawful, so how is this the ECtHR blocking the flights?! 🤯

[Rishi Sunak @RishiSunak]

Following today’s ruling, I’m taking the extraordinary step of introducing emergency legislation to confirm Rwanda is safe.

I will not allow a foreign court, like the European Court of Human Rights, to block these flights.

Here’s the plan in full ⬇️
1/5

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

And then, to top it off, the PM wants to blame this all on a foreign court. The last time I checked, the Supreme Court was not a foreign Court, and so perhaps the ministers would better spend their time digesting the judgment rather the being quick to make catchy headlines.

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

domestic courts to first determine the lawfulness of the proposal. Essentially, the legal proceedings in the UK’s domestic courts should first be allowed to conclude themselves before any flights take off.

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

The Supreme Court, which only recently in the Bill of Rights Bill, was to be enshrined as being the only Court that should have the right to decide our domestic affairs, is now being overlooked by our government because it essentially told the ministers no.

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

Firstly, the only involvement the ECtHR has had in the Rwanda program to date is the interim measure it granted which halted the first flight. The interim measure was granted on the grounds that a domestic legal challenge was being brought against the proposal and it was for the

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

Then, we have the PM make a bold statement that he will ‘not allow a foreign court to block our ability to get these flights off’ in reference to the ECtHR. I find this rather bizarre.

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

But where it gets confusing is in the Governments response. The PM believes that laying down emergency legislation to declare Rwanda a safe country will overturn the evidence that has already been presented to demonstrate the factual situation on the ground?

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

It was reassuring to hear and read the lengths the SC took to dispel the thought that the Rwanda proposal is against the ECHR and will not be supported by the Strasbourg Court as being the sole reason for it being considered unlawful.

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

As Lord Reed explained, the ECHR had little bearing over the decision the SC reached, and it was the evidence of the UNHCR and other international law which guided the SC to make its decision.

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

Instead, they emphasised that the principle of non-refoulement is one detailed in other international treaties and conventions of which the UK is a member state.

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

I sense the Tory party will now split itself apart in an attempt to make the ECHR an issue to take to the public in the next GE, rather than work to fix the broken domestic asylum system.

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

Slight frustration with media in their discussion on the SC ruling this morning on Rwanda. Very much driving the narrative that this will draw battle lines on whether the government will now consider leaving the ECHR.

[Liam @LiamBGiles]

It seems that there is a media and political drive to divide the public once again over a European institution, despite the fact that the presence or not of the ECHR would have had little to no influence of the decision the SC reached or indeed the Court below.