Are our judges deliberately perverse?

Or does it just seem that way?

We face a situation where there is almost nothing that the government and the security services can do about known terrorist suspects, in cases where there is insufficient evidence to mount a full-scale prosecution.  Again and again, our courts strike down attempts to repatriate them (“they might be mistreated in their own countries”); or to use any kind of preventative custody; or to impose curfews and to restrict their movements.

Again and again, the decisions of the courts are inspired by an extreme left-wing libertarian interpretation of the law, based on the extremely wide-ranging and ill-defined “rights” contained in the European Convention of Human Rights.  And the decisions appear to imply an assumption that the rights of foreigners always trump the rights of Brits.

Before the General Election, the Conservative Party appeared to be committed either to the wholesale repeal of Labour’s ill-judged accession to the ECHR, or at least to the creation of exceptions and derogations that would have allowed us to protect British citizens and to repatriate foreign nationals whose presence in the UK was deemed a threat to public safety.  There was loose talk of creating a new, British Bill of Rights which would replace the ECHR in this country.  Personally, I never rated this idea.  I rather agree with Margaret Thatcher that in this country we have democracy, and common law, and a free press, and that is enough – or at least it would be, if our judges exercised a little common sense, and were prepared to take into account the rights of British citizens as well as the rights of foreign terrorists.

In any case, the commitment to repeal the ECHR in this country, like so much else, seems to have fallen foul of the Coalition Agreement and Nick Clegg’s knee-jerk approval of any EU measure, however ill-conceived.

On the back of all this we now have the case of Aso Mohammed Ibrahim, a 33-year-old Iraqi Kurd despite having killed a child, Amy Houston in Darwen, Lancs in 2003.  At the time he was driving while disqualified, and he failed to stop after the accident.  Yet the Immigration and Asylum Chamber has ruled that he may stay.  They don’t even have the poor fig-leaf of claiming that his life would be at risk in Iraq.  They base their decision on his right to “family life”.  So what about the rights of the Houston family?  No tribunal ruling can bring their daughter back.  This man is exactly the sort of criminal alien who should be deported after serving his sentence, and if he wanted a right to family life, he should have thought of that before driving dangerously while disqualified.

If he is so desperate to spend time with his family, there is no reason they should not accompany him back to Iraq.

Both David Cameron and Immigration Minister Damien Green have expressed their anger, and called for an appeal by the Border Agency against the decision.  And quite right too.  But it’s not enough.  We need to fulfil our election pledge to draw the teeth of the ECHR.  And we have to re-educate our judges.  We have to find a way – heaven knows how but that’s what the government is for – to establish a proper balance between the rights of British nationals and the rights of others.  And (whisper it quietly), where these rights conflict, British judges must put their compatriots’ interests first.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Are our judges deliberately perverse?

  1. Peter Hulme Cross says:

    European Convention on Human Rights Article 8 states: ‘everyone has the right to respect in their family and private life’. As shown above, British judges are turning that statement in to a major factor in immigration policy. The Judges interpretation in this case effectively states that no criminal who is an illegal immigrant can be deported if, in the intervening years it takes for their appeal to be finally heard, they intentionally or even casually father a child by a local woman. Mr Ibrahim had six years in which to father a child and thereby secure his freedom from deportation. Unsurprisingly, he managed it.

    And this is The Law, which we are all supposed to uphold and respect??!!

    David Cameron, before the general election, pointed out that the Human Rights Act was in need of reform so that, ‘we can have human rights with common sense.’ Now that the election is out of the way he has dropped that commitment. All that Cameron does now is bleat about the decision and hope that an appeal is successful. What a moral coward. Does he think we should respect him??!!

  2. Heather Alibakir says:

    I am sickened by this decision. What about Mr. Houston’s right to family life? This little girl was his only child and I understand that he cannot have any more, so where is HIS family life.

    The judgement should have been made on this man’s circumstances at the time of the incident as clearly, he has been given the time, due to our lax systems, to create a family knowing full well that it would protect him. He was due to be deported before this, so what happened then?

    Justice in the UK? honour in the UK? patriotism in our country? Forget it; it is every man for himself, including judges who are able to get their names in the paper and become self-important and popular with the EU Human Rights Brigade who are fanatical to retain their Golden Egg jobs.

    Whatever the system would like to think, some of us are not European, not even citizens of the UK, we are English and were proud of it, but now
    hang our heads in despair. As for being a Conservative, please let us have less of the Libdemism and more of the policies for which we worked and voted.
    Best wishes to you Roger and congratulations for standing up to be counted.

  3. Sadly, Roger Helmer’s depiction of the current situation regarding our judges and their ongoing subordination to the ECHR. Clearly, matters will only worsen if no decisive action is taken soon? Indeed, expressing anger is achieving nothing (in these circumstances). We need more prominent Conservatives (like Roger), to speak their minds publicly and then to take matters further. Keep it up, sir! The comments by Peter Hulme and Heather Alibakir (see above), are also probably much in line with what many UK citizens think (but simply lack the courage to speak out openly).

  4. Robert Dow says:

    I disagree with the concluding paragraph: DO NOT whisper this quietly; roar it from the rooftops, and BOMBARD your MPs and MSPs with demands to scrap the European human rights nonsense in the UK.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s