To think it's time to leave the ECHR?

[Sausagenbacon]

www.thejc.com/news/uk/gazan-family-refugee-status-asylum-rejection-gwsq2c8b

I actually can given that I'm an OCI. But given I'm no longer a citizen of India, the government has every right just to simply refuse me entry and not let me stay (if they find it counter to the interests of India). Even if I huff and puff and claim all sorts of refugee and asylum and family life status they'll deny it if they want to. They have the power.

An woman thinking that leaving the ECHR is a good idea is no friend of women.

Yes, that's all correct but none of that supports the point that the pp to whom I was replying made, ie that Arab countries don't take Gazan refugees.

Because of shitty post Brexit policy. They used to come in lorries before anyway.

My dad’s a builder, and last I checked he was from Middlesbrough.

Vacuous reply? Irony is clearly lost on you. 🤣

More like that you can’t refute what I wrote so you tried to look superior and dismiss it… only making yourself look stupid in the attempt!

I’m not entirely sure what I think about the ECHR. It’s a complex issue… but those arguing for keeping it on this thread are doing such an APPALLING job of defending it, by insulting the British public and showing contempt for democracy, that I’m now leaning more towards the UK pulling out.

Well it will too late. The mess is going on right now and needs stopping asap.

The largest number of Gazan refugees are in Jordan. Syria and Lebanon also take large numbers. The number coming here is tiny.

According to the Telegraph, the ruling was made under section 6 of the British Human Right Act, which says no public body can breach your human rights. And in fact, it is entirely possible for the BHRA to differ from the ECHR, with justification.

Curiously, I can only find this report on very right leaning media outlets, and there is no record of the judgment on the U.K. courts decision website. Perhaps someone else can find a link to the judgement for more detail.

Your argument is specious.

A UK court ruled so because they were "bound to follow the ECHR ruling".

You know exactly what I’m saying about the family issue and the interpretation is not in our interest for sure, the people who live in the UK, pay council tax and tax etc

how is this situation beneficial to the UK in the long run?

The "Brexit experience" has shown us that trying to explain the realities of a complex situation to people shouting "Leave" doesn't work. Because they metaphorically stick their fingers in their ears and yell "Not listening". And yes, some of those people are demonstrably stupid, many of them noticeably ignorant of the actual facts and a number motivated solely by racism.

The comnents tonight show exactly the same with those shouting "Leave".

There's a simple way not to be called "stupid". Don't act stupid and don't opine on a subject without bothering to read up on the basics.

I know builders who came here on sham student visas

Women can disagree about whether the ECHR protects their rights sufficiently especially in light of the Amnesty report which branded women defending sex based rights as ‘anti rights’ (report since withdrawn).

An explanation of your position would be appreciated rather than your declaration that women who support leaving are traitors to their sex.

A British Parliament democratically elected by the British people should be sovereign,
and able enact legislation as it sees fit.

The fact that Parliament can decide to leave the ECHR makes a mockery of those that say we can’t leave the ECHR because of what the next Government might do… because the next Government can just leave the ECHR, and do those things anyway! But it’s the argument that’s always trotted out, and it’s a deeply stupid one.

The UK isn't subscribed to an external court.

What do you think ECHR stands for?

Of course we did it was just via lorries. And other EU countries are struggling, except a couple who are more hardline eg Poland.

The Strasbourg Court is the judicial body that enforces the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

It can when it comes to things like equality in the workplace (e.g., citizen's rights in relation to another private individual/company), for so long as the government wants to have the protections in law.

When it comes to human rights in relation to the state, though, we have Parliamentary Sovereignty, so your human rights protections would be revocable at the government's whim. The ECtHR is important as an external check we couldn't otherwise have in our constitutional setup.

And Hungary. (There's a reason MNers say they find those countries so safe)

I agree

That was being stopped long before Brexit became a reality. The numbers had tumbled from the highs of the early 2000s. Technology makes it much easier to detect them.

The ECHR doesn't make rulings. It's a document. A document is pieces of papet.

Difficult to believe someone is actually this stupid, but there you go. Every dsy's a school day.

Do British and Irish citizens live in the continent of Europe? Ireland was one of the founding members of the Convention, as well as the UK.

Do you have the transcript of the ruling?