Posted on 06/14/2022 11:37:44 AM PDT by RandFan
As I understand it, the U.K. is required to accept an equal number of refugees currently in Rwanda for every one they ship there. The Rwanda refugees are primarily from the Congo and Burundi and are at high risk because of medical, mental or age-related problems.
The U.K. is essentially trading able-bodied refugees for sick ones.
Strasbourg? And if the UK doesn’t comply? What are they going to do? Pelt the English with choucroute (sauerkraut)?
UK is no longer part of EU, court has no jurisdiction.
They will taunt them a second time.
UK isn’t in the EU anymore
The court lacks enforcement powers. Some states [nations] have ignored ECtHR verdicts and continued practices judged to be human rights violations.[66][67] Although all damages must be paid to the applicant within the time frame specified by the court (usually three months) or else will accumulate interest, there is no formal deadline for any more complex compliance required by the judgement. However, by leaving a judgement unimplemented for a long period of time, brings into question the state's commitment to addressing human rights violations in a timely fashion.[68]
Sounds racist to me. What does the EU have against Rwanda?
Cannot post my conclusion.
But it is time to put an end to cross-border invasion everywhere.
GB is no longer in the EU. I did not know Strausburg was in England......
Fly them to Strasbourg and leave them on the tarmac.
Why does an EU court have jurisdiction in the UK? Is it really ordering EU nations to deny the plan air space?
It’s very confusing
The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU.
It is a separate court established after WW2 . It rules over the whole continent of Europe with a human rights charter.
They’re blocking the deportation of the immigrants because they say their human rights will be infringed.
...because if they really believed in human rights, no one would be forced to pay for illegal aliens. That's slavery.
The ECHR is not a EU court, has nothing to do with the EU. The UK still recognises its jurisdiction.
The ECHR is not a EU court, has nothing to do with the EU. The UK still recognises its jurisdiction.
Untrue. The UK still recognises the ECHRs jurisdiction. It’s not a EU court.
The ECHR is not a EU court. It’s still recognised by the UK.
The ECHR is not a EU court. The UK still recognise s its jurisdiction
It adjudicates breaches of the European Convention on Human Rights which was originally drafted by the UK after WW2.
“Untrue. The UK still recognises the ECHRs jurisdiction. It’s not a EU court.”
Only by choice.
It has no binding authority.
Britain has the sovereign authority to ignore it.
Indeed. But given that the UK was instrumental in setting up the Court and and the European Convention of Human Rights on which it’s based, to do so would be, to put it mildly, embarrassing .
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.