Perhaps Another Reason For Voting Out?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/12160533/Rochdale-child-sex-grooming-ringleader-uses-European-human-rights-law-to-avoid-being-kicked-out-of-UK.html

It is reported that this piece of scum has £83,000 in a UK bank account, I wonder how much of that has been used to pay for his legal fees?

/// Three times married Ahmed told the court he had four children living in the UK, had lived here for nearly 50 years and had £83,000 in a UK bank account. ///

[Buenchico]

^^^ An accurate and detailed answer from New Judge which correctly points out that the ECHR has nothing whatsoever to to with the EU.

To fill in a bit of detail though, I'll mention that the UK is signed up to the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (and thus to the workings of the ECHR) through our membership of the Council of Europe.

The UK has been a member of the Council since it was formed in 1949 and will STILL be a member even if the UK leaves the EU. There are far more countries in the Council of Europe than in the EU including, for example, Switzerland, Russia and Ukraine.

[New Judge]

Thanks for the kind words, Togo an sp. Been perfectly well thanks, very well in fact following a brief sojuorn in sunnier climes.

Yes, 'Chico has expanded perfectly and hopefully people understand the disconnect between the ECHR and the EU. Of course Mr Cameron's (as yet unfullfilled) promise to withdraw from the ECHR raises an interesting conundrum. Withdrawal from the Convention would mean almost certain expulsion from the Council of Europe. All EU members are members of the Council of Europe and although I don't believe it is written in stone it seems to be a "given" that EU members must also be members of the Council of Europe. So it would be interesting to note the EU's position on the UK's status as a member should it be expelled from the Council of Europe by virtue of its withdrawal from the ECHR.

Perhaps one of the PM's lackeys has uncovered this conundrum and it may explain why his earlier proposed withdrawal has been quietly shelved.

[Togo]

Hmmm it doesn't appear difficult to try that. Greece declared themselves withdrawn from the council when the military junta took control in 1967, and were officially out until 1974.

[agchristie]

Yes, funny how convictions are seen as blaming Muslims for everything rather than a trial based on evidence.

It was only a matter of weeks ago when a female was sent down for six years if I recall correctly having decided she made a mistake travelling to Syria. Her family described that verdict as 'farcical'.

So much for our judicial system being recognised as the best!!

[New Judge]

"Greece declared themselves withdrawn from the council when the military junta took control in 1967, and were officially out until 1974."

Quite true, Togo. But Greece was not an EU member then so the issue did not arise.

[dannyk13]

There have been many posts giving reasons for voting out, has anybody any reasons for staying in?

[Togo]

Yes Judge, but our use of the same mechanism to withdraw from the council would certainly raise the EU membership issue. How neat would that be?

[New Judge]

Yes Togo. I probably did not make myself too clear but that's exactly the point I was making. A few years ago (before an EU referndum was on the table) the PM vowed to withdraw from the ECHR. This would have meant certain expulsion from the Council of Europe and since it seems a given that EU members are also members of the Council of Europe it would have been interesting to see how that panned out.

It's all water under the bridge, of course, because if and when the referendum is held is the vote is "leave" it will not matter and if the vote is "stay" there will be no further talk of abandoning any Europe-wide institution or agreement ever again.

[Togo]

Agreed New Judge, although I did find the last two words of your 13:01 post somewhat chilling.

[New Judge]

Perhaps "ever" is a bit strong but certainly forever as far as anybody over about 40 is concerned.

If a vote to remain is secured I cannot imagine a similar opportunity being granted to the electorate for at least a generation and probably for a good forty years. During that time there will be no talk of withdrawing from any European institution (including those that have no connection with the EU). "Further Integration" will continue apace until "Ever Closer Union" is secured.

If voters think matters are bad at present they should consider this: this integration and closer union will include many more nations. There are currently five candidates and two potential candidates to join. These include nations which will no doubt assist the UK greatly with its trade and wellbeing such as Albania and Turkey. The combined population of them is around 95 million (though that of Turkey has increased by 2 million in the last year alone). Five of the seven are in the bottom half of nations listed by GDP per capita. The other two rank at a respectable 64 and 82 (out of 185). The average GDP per capita of the candidate nations is $8,300. This is greatly boosted by Turkey which has twice the average income of most of the rest but it is still less than a fifth of that of the UK. It would be interesting to see how the considerable contributions from the “rich” EU members are planed to be distributed among this lot. It would also be interesting to see the life plans of those currently in nations where they earn a tenth of the sum they could in Western Europe.

Mr Cameron’s “deal” that he is currently negotiating consists mainly of measures which are aimed at limiting the damage inflicted on the UK courtesy of its EU membership. There is nothing in it that will give us greater benefits. There will be considerably more damage inflicted and much reduced benefits (from a low starting point) over the next forty years and the burden does indeed weigh heavily on those of us casting our votes.