A legal farce! Duncan Smith insists UK must rely on our own courts on Rwanda

Rwanda ‘turned into legal farce’ says Iain Duncan Smith

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. More info

The former Conservative Party leader labelled the intervention of the European Court of Human Rights a “legal farce” as he argued the British Government had the full backing of British courts to continue with the Rwanda flights. Mr Duncan-Smith told LBC: “This has turned into a legal farce really because all our courts have agreed that the Government may go ahead with this, including the Supreme Court.

“To be overruled by a court that had no representations made to its and just intervened on the back of stuff that it had read as it were.

“So it’s a ridiculous point, the Government’s got to deal with the convention anyway.

“If we have our own bill of rights, then we shouldn’t have to refer constantly back to the court in Strasbourg because we should rely on our own courts to build up human rights and the rule of law, which they were doing the other day, so the government should proceed, continue to go on with this.

“Because one of the big problems is that people are dying in the channel in these rickety boats, abused by the traffickers, paying huge sums of money and people die in the Channel and not one single alternative has been raised.”

 JUST IN: ‘VDL mired in problems’ EU in disarray as bloc lacks true leader

He added: “The one thing that people say is really they should make the Channel route in easier.

“Well, that just means you end up with more asylum seekers coming out of asylum who are actually coming for economic reasons.

“I don’t have any problem, as it were with people trying to get into countries for economic reasons, but that’s not asylum seeking.

“They shouldn’t be under the the asylum seekers procedure, which is about those who are suffering serious depredations and problems as a result of what happens to them personally in their own country. So Government’s got to continue with it.”


Rwanda: Robertson says UK Government ‘has a choice’

Frances Swaine, who represents a man due to be flown to Rwanda, told BBC Breakfast that the Government should consider whether it is worth it “financially or legally” to attempt another flight.

It comes after the first flight taking migrants to Rwanda was cancelled at the last minute on Tuesday night following interventions from the European Court of Human Rights.

Ms Swaine said the judicial review into the matter is due to take place in about six weeks’ time.

“The European Court of Human Rights has recommended that there are no other flights proposals put together until the substantial judicial review hearing into the whole policy is heard,” she said. “We’re expecting that that would take place in about six weeks’ time, during July, although we don’t have a firm date for it yet.

‘Cold, callous, calculated siege’ EU’s VDL savages Putin’s famine [REPORT]
Brexit: UK set to turn back on hated EU deal [REPORT]
EU revolts against VDL’s plan to tax ‘poorest’ Europeans [REPORT]

“And I think if I was the Government, which obviously I’m not, but if I was, I would be sitting back and thinking was it worth it, either from a financial or a legal perspective, to organise one of these very expensive flights again when they’ve been so unsuccessful this time around on legal grounds.

“Because there will be a decision in July as to whether or not this policy can be extant, or whether there would need to be some changes to the law if the Government was absolutely determined to see it through.

“But wait until we have the decision first and then decide whether to go ahead.”

She said she “understands” the frustrations of those who wanted the flight to go ahead.

Source: Read Full Article