‘The UK is deliberately destabilising the entire concept of universal human rights’
Hannah Davenport
Yesterday
Left Foot Forward
Left Foot Forward
The world’s leading human rights organisation has issued a damning condemnation of the UK government’s domestic policies and failure in Gaza, accusing the UK of “deliberately destabilising” global human rights.
In a truly bleak assessment, Amnesty International said Britain had breached international human rights commitments at a “perilous” time in global history, as a result of the UK government’s policies targeting asylum seekers and protesters.
Amnesty’s 2024 annual global report notes Britain’s weakening global and domestic human rights protections for the sake of the government’s own political gain, and at a time when the global community is failing to uphold international law.
Amnesty also accused the UK Government of ‘grotesque double-standards’ for bolstering the actions of Israel and the US in Gaza, as the UK continues to arm Israel while failing to condemn Israel’s actions in the region which ‘likely amounts to war crimes’.
The UK’s weak support for the international criminal court (ICC) investigation into human rights violations in Israel and Palestine was also condemned, along with its failure to stand up as a strong voice in the UN to stop human rights violations in Gaza.
Sacha Deshmukh, Amnesty International UK’s chief executive said: “There’s no doubt in my mind that the UK will be judged harshly by history for its failure to help prevent civilian slaughter in Gaza.”
When it comes to the ability to defend human rights at home, Amnesty lists the UK among countries affected by new laws which restrict citizens’ rights to freedom of expression.
Furthermore the universal application of human rights had in effect been ended by the UK government, as Amnesty said the Illegal Migration Act, and government rhetoric around it, were in conflict with the UK refugee convention and European convention on human rights – “switching off” protections for refugees.
The report also noted the increased use of facial recognition technology to police public protest and sporting events in the UK, along with India, Brazil and Argentina, and how this discriminates against marginalised communities.
In the hard-hitting review Deshmukh said: “The UK is deliberately destabilising the entire concept of universal human rights through its appalling domestic policies and politicking.”
What a legacy the Tory government will leave behind.
Amnesty International’s 2024 State of the World’s Human Rights report documents human rights concerns last year in 155 countries.
(Image credit: Richard Potts / Flickr)
Hannah Davenport is news reporter at Left Foot Forward
Baroness praised for cutting takedown of Rwanda bill and Tory attacks on the vulnerable
Last night MPs and representatives from the House of Lords made impassioned speeches regarding the controversial Safety of Rwanda Bill as it was eventually passed through.
With widespread condemnation and outrage from human rights groups and politicians, the plan to remove asylum seekers and send them to the east African country has provoked powerful words from those defending the rights of the people who will have their lives severely affected as a result of the bill.
Addressing members of the House of Lords on Monday evening, former leader of the Green Party Baroness Bennett was praised for her “magnificent” takedown of the policy, as she also heeded a warning to MPs to “stand up” and defend their principles.
In her speech to the chamber, Baroness Bennett said: “I rise with a heavy heart given the lack of further amendment to this dreadful, international law busting bill.
“I note that Amnesty International warned airline companies that many members of the public take an extremely negative view of the content of the policy.
“Those were unnecessary words, because no company of any repute whatsoever is going to take part in implementing this dreadful policy, that’s a measure of this bill and the disgraceful, despicable actions it represents.”
Speaking of their role in the House of Lords, Bennett argued that, just because it is an unelected chamber of parliament, “does not mean this house is without moral or legal responsibility”.
“I have asked this house a number of times, if not now when, what will it take to make this house say here we take a stand?”
Bennett then went on to lay into the Tory government’s record of legislative attacks on vulnerable people in society.
“We’ve had the abomination of the elections act, the elements of the policing act that targeted Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people explicitly, we’ve had multiple indefensible restrictions on the right to protest. Now, we are letting through an attack on some of the most vulnerable, desperate people on this planet.
“What more will we let through? I suggest to noble lords as they leave this chamber tonight to ask themselves that question.
“With a desperate flailing government bereft of ideas, and philosophy without principles, this house will keep being tested.
“So I ask these empty benches, you might be waiting for an election, but what kind of country will it be if you don’t stand up now?”
You can watch the full video here.
(Image credit: Twitter screenshot)
Hannah Davenport is news reporter at Left Foot Forward, focusing on trade unions and environmental issues
'With a desperate flailing government bereft of ideas, and philosophy without principles, this house will keep being tested'
23 April, 2024
Last night MPs and representatives from the House of Lords made impassioned speeches regarding the controversial Safety of Rwanda Bill as it was eventually passed through.
With widespread condemnation and outrage from human rights groups and politicians, the plan to remove asylum seekers and send them to the east African country has provoked powerful words from those defending the rights of the people who will have their lives severely affected as a result of the bill.
Addressing members of the House of Lords on Monday evening, former leader of the Green Party Baroness Bennett was praised for her “magnificent” takedown of the policy, as she also heeded a warning to MPs to “stand up” and defend their principles.
In her speech to the chamber, Baroness Bennett said: “I rise with a heavy heart given the lack of further amendment to this dreadful, international law busting bill.
“I note that Amnesty International warned airline companies that many members of the public take an extremely negative view of the content of the policy.
“Those were unnecessary words, because no company of any repute whatsoever is going to take part in implementing this dreadful policy, that’s a measure of this bill and the disgraceful, despicable actions it represents.”
Speaking of their role in the House of Lords, Bennett argued that, just because it is an unelected chamber of parliament, “does not mean this house is without moral or legal responsibility”.
“I have asked this house a number of times, if not now when, what will it take to make this house say here we take a stand?”
Bennett then went on to lay into the Tory government’s record of legislative attacks on vulnerable people in society.
“We’ve had the abomination of the elections act, the elements of the policing act that targeted Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people explicitly, we’ve had multiple indefensible restrictions on the right to protest. Now, we are letting through an attack on some of the most vulnerable, desperate people on this planet.
“What more will we let through? I suggest to noble lords as they leave this chamber tonight to ask themselves that question.
“With a desperate flailing government bereft of ideas, and philosophy without principles, this house will keep being tested.
“So I ask these empty benches, you might be waiting for an election, but what kind of country will it be if you don’t stand up now?”
You can watch the full video here.
(Image credit: Twitter screenshot)
Hannah Davenport is news reporter at Left Foot Forward, focusing on trade unions and environmental issues
‘A stain on the UK’s moral reputation’: How human rights groups have reacted to the passing of Rwanda bill
'A national disgrace'
'A national disgrace'
23 April, 2024
'
TweetShareWhatsAppMail
The passage of the Rwanda Bill late last night, after a parliamentary showdown ended between the Commons and the Lords, has been met with condemnation and outrage by a number of human rights groups.
Rishi Sunak’s emergency Rwanda Bill finally passed, with the Prime Minister saying that the first flights removing asylum seekers who arrive illegally to the UK to the east African country are due to take off in 10-12 weeks time.
Sunak’s Safety of Rwanda Bill, which forms a key part of his plan to stop small boat crossings across the channel, has faced a number of legal setbacks, after the Supreme Court ruled last year that it could lead to human rights breaches. Sunak has brought forward emergency legislation, in a bid to force the policy through, compelling judges to treat Rwanda as a safe country and giving ministers the powers to disregard sections of the Human Rights Act.
Forcing courts to treat Rwanda as a safe country and to disregard evidence to the contrary, while also ignoring the UK’s commitments to human rights laws has caused major concern.
The legislation orders the courts to ignore key sections of the Human Rights Act in an attempt to sidestep the Supreme Court’s existing judgment. It also orders the courts to ignore other British laws or international rules – such as the international Refugee Convention – that stand in the way of deportations to Rwanda.
Reacting to the passage of the legislation, Amnesty International called it a ‘national disgrace’.
It said in a statement: “The UK parliament has passed a bill that takes a hatchet to international legal protections for some of the most vulnerable people in the world and it is a matter of national disgrace that our political establishment has let this bill pass.
“The bill is built on a deeply authoritarian notion attacking one of the most basic roles played by the courts – the ability to look at evidence, decide on the facts of a case and apply the law accordingly. It’s absurd that the courts are forced to treat Rwanda as a ‘safe country’ and forbidden from considering all evidence to the contrary.
“Switching off human rights protections for people who the Government thinks it can gain political capital from attacking sets an extremely dangerous precedent.”
Enver Solomon, CEO of the Refugee Council, said the passage of the bill was an Orwellian Act which will simply exacerbate chaos in the asylum system.
He continued: “Even on the Government’s best-case scenario, the Rwanda scheme will remove no more than 5,000 people a year out of the tens of thousands of people shut out of the asylum system. Inexplicably, the Government would rather pay to look after them indefinitely than simply grant them a fair hearing on UK soil to decide who can settle here. “What’s more, the Government has never been able to produce any evidence that the Rwanda scheme will deter refugees coming to the UK. The Prime Minister reportedly believed the ‘deterrent won’t work’ when he was Chancellor.”
The Council of Europe’s human rights watchdog has also condemned Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda scheme, saying it raises “major issues about the human rights of asylum seekers and the rule of law”.
The body’s human rights commissioner, Michael O’Flaherty, was cited in the Guardian warning that the UK was prohibited from subjecting, even indirectly, people to “refoulement” – the act of forcing a refugee or asylum seeker to a country or territory where he or she is likely to face persecution – including under article 3 of the European convention on human rights, under the refugee convention, and under “a range of other international instruments”.
Basit Mahmood is editor of Left Foot Forward
TweetShareWhatsAppMail
The passage of the Rwanda Bill late last night, after a parliamentary showdown ended between the Commons and the Lords, has been met with condemnation and outrage by a number of human rights groups.
Rishi Sunak’s emergency Rwanda Bill finally passed, with the Prime Minister saying that the first flights removing asylum seekers who arrive illegally to the UK to the east African country are due to take off in 10-12 weeks time.
Sunak’s Safety of Rwanda Bill, which forms a key part of his plan to stop small boat crossings across the channel, has faced a number of legal setbacks, after the Supreme Court ruled last year that it could lead to human rights breaches. Sunak has brought forward emergency legislation, in a bid to force the policy through, compelling judges to treat Rwanda as a safe country and giving ministers the powers to disregard sections of the Human Rights Act.
Forcing courts to treat Rwanda as a safe country and to disregard evidence to the contrary, while also ignoring the UK’s commitments to human rights laws has caused major concern.
The legislation orders the courts to ignore key sections of the Human Rights Act in an attempt to sidestep the Supreme Court’s existing judgment. It also orders the courts to ignore other British laws or international rules – such as the international Refugee Convention – that stand in the way of deportations to Rwanda.
Reacting to the passage of the legislation, Amnesty International called it a ‘national disgrace’.
It said in a statement: “The UK parliament has passed a bill that takes a hatchet to international legal protections for some of the most vulnerable people in the world and it is a matter of national disgrace that our political establishment has let this bill pass.
“The bill is built on a deeply authoritarian notion attacking one of the most basic roles played by the courts – the ability to look at evidence, decide on the facts of a case and apply the law accordingly. It’s absurd that the courts are forced to treat Rwanda as a ‘safe country’ and forbidden from considering all evidence to the contrary.
“Switching off human rights protections for people who the Government thinks it can gain political capital from attacking sets an extremely dangerous precedent.”
Enver Solomon, CEO of the Refugee Council, said the passage of the bill was an Orwellian Act which will simply exacerbate chaos in the asylum system.
He continued: “Even on the Government’s best-case scenario, the Rwanda scheme will remove no more than 5,000 people a year out of the tens of thousands of people shut out of the asylum system. Inexplicably, the Government would rather pay to look after them indefinitely than simply grant them a fair hearing on UK soil to decide who can settle here. “What’s more, the Government has never been able to produce any evidence that the Rwanda scheme will deter refugees coming to the UK. The Prime Minister reportedly believed the ‘deterrent won’t work’ when he was Chancellor.”
The Council of Europe’s human rights watchdog has also condemned Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda scheme, saying it raises “major issues about the human rights of asylum seekers and the rule of law”.
The body’s human rights commissioner, Michael O’Flaherty, was cited in the Guardian warning that the UK was prohibited from subjecting, even indirectly, people to “refoulement” – the act of forcing a refugee or asylum seeker to a country or territory where he or she is likely to face persecution – including under article 3 of the European convention on human rights, under the refugee convention, and under “a range of other international instruments”.
Basit Mahmood is editor of Left Foot Forward
No comments:
Post a Comment