which rules on the (non-EU) European Convention of Human Rights. There is one mechanism available to us: it's withdrawing from the convention, which is what he wants to do, since he doesn't care about human rights.
A 'mechanism' to allow the government to introduce ad hoc legislation to correct court judgments that ministers believe are 'incorrect' will form part of proposals to reform the Human Rights Act, the lord chancellor has revealed.
In an interview with the Sunday Telegraph, Dominic Raab MP said he expected a consultation on his proposals to be opened within the next two months. The aim, he said, is to restore power to parliament. 'We want to protect and preserve the prerogatives of parliament from being whittled away by judicial legislation, abroad or indeed at home,' he said.
Referring to the European Court of Human Rights, Raab said: 'We want the Supreme Court to have a last word on interpreting the laws of the land, not the Strasbourg court.' He said it was wrong that judges in Strasbourg ruled on matters relating to British soldiers fighting overseas and revealed that he was examining how to curtail the court’s influence in the UK.
Raab said: 'If you read the negotiating history to the European Convention, it was never supposed to have extraterritorial effect … I think that’s wrong, that any court is effectively through judicial legislation, creating new law rather than just applying it. So I think we will want to have a look at that.'
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/hr-reform-raab-plans-mechanism-to-correct-incorrect-judgments-/5110196.articleThe whole point about the convention is that it binds governments and legislatures. We still have a British judge on the court, as do Ukraine, Armenia and many other non-EU countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_judges_of_the_European_Court_of_Human_Rights
= new reply since forum marked as read
