Let us face it: Immigration is an issue that figures prominently in the minds of many voters.
Christopher Booker has correctly diagnosed the part of the problem (the country’s judges interpretation the ECHR) and has correctly diagnosed the part of the solution (to take control of the country’s judges).
The thing he does not venture forth to do is to offer suggestions of how to take control. For a very good reason: any workable solution will be terribly controversial – far more controversial than the Editor of the Daily Telegraph would want to see printed in his newspaper.
It therefore falls to the British Gazette to undertake this role.
Read on Dear Reader…..
Before describing the solution, a brief summary of Christopher Booker’s points are these:
- the judges at the European Court of Human Rights have interpreted the treaty far beyond what those including the late Sir Winston Churchill intended.
- the English and Scottish judges have also interpreted the treaty and the Human Rights Act far beyond what those including the late Sir Winston Churchill intended.
It is clear then that the solution is to take control of OUR (England and Scotland’s) judges. There is NO NEED to repeal the Human Rights Act and NO NEED to leave the EHCR. Taking control of our judges will enable this country to govern itself.
Now, those readers of a logical frame of mind may well ask what proof, what evidence can you provide Mr Editor?
Dear Reader, the answer can be provided in two words: Vladimir Putin. Russia is a signatory of the ECHR. The reader will of course realise that NO Russian judge is going to give a judgement on ANY case that Mr Putin has not sanctioned!
Thus we see laid out before us the basis of this country’s solution.
Achieving such will be very controversial and divisive.
What needs to happen is root and branch reform of the justice system in England and Wales and also in Scotland.
Now here is another huge problem: Scotland. Scotland’s legal system is independent of England. It has always been so. It should always remain so. That was the deal in 1707 and that deal should be adhered to.
What needs to happen is that there needs to be a separate division of the High Court of Justice to handle all cases related to immigration and human rights, thus removing this from the family division. In addition, the Court of Appeal, which sits in London at the Royal Courts of Justice and consists of two divisions: The Civil Division and the Criminal needs a third division.
These divisions (High Court and Court of Appeal) should be called The Bill of Rights Division.
The Bill of Rights Division should have responsibility for cases brought under and therefore the interpretation of law of the following:
- Magna Carta, 1215
- Declaration of Rights 1688 and the Bill of Rights 1689
- The Privy Council Oath
- The Coronation Oath
- Treaties entered into by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (this includes the EU and ECHR).
The Supreme Court needs to be abolished and the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords has to be re-established together with the ancient office of Lord Chancellor restored to its role and functions. NB: These reforms were made by treasonous administrations in order to comply with the wishes of the ECHR!!!!!
What needs to be done when these reforms have been implemented is that the Lord Chancellor needs to make sure of the people he appoints to the role of President of the two Bill of Rights divisions.
As the Reader will see, the scope of the new divisions will extend to dealing with the governance of the country and should see to it that not only the UK withdraws from the EU but that no such experiments with treason should be attempted in future.
What will happen of course is that there will be cases brought before the ECHR and the ECHR will give a judgement that will differ from that given by the House of Lords. What to do in such cases? Ignore the ECHR!
What would happen were the country to do this?
Well, the country would be out of the EU for a start as EU membership is incompatible with the British Constitution. As for ignoring the ECHR? Nothing. Other signatory states have the following choices as to what to do with a UK ignoring ECHR judgements:
1. Do nothing.
2. Tell the UK that it should not ignore the ECHR.
What will they do if the UK ignores their representations?
1. Do nothing.
2. Impose sanctions.
Rest assured, they will Do Nothing.
The opposition will not come from outside the country’s borders but from within. The politically correct left wing establishment led by such as Liberty, the Guardian with support from the BBC will be on the warpath. Sharmishta Chakrabarti (above) of Liberty will be apoplectic with rage! Many judges and barristers will resign in protest.
This is not such a huge problem. This country’s higher education institutions churn out hundreds of law graduates every year. There is no shortage of lawyers. Mathematicians and physicists yes. But not lawyers.
It is important for these reforms to take place for the world is not getting a kinder place to the poverty stricken masses in what is known as the third world. The huge streams of migrants making the perilous voyage from North Africa to Europe will not cease. Unless the reforms re instituted this country will continue to take in a constant stream of such people. The country will be overwhelmed by the sheer numbers if nothing is done.