Judges to rule on Palestinian group's legal action over Israel military exports
Al-Haq is taking legal action against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) over its decision to continue licensing exports of components for F-35 fighter jets.
In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict.
But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, with lawyers for Al-Haq telling the High Court in May that this 'carve-out' was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'.
The DBT is defending the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law' and that suspending the licences would negatively impact a wider international programme.
Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn are due to hand down their ruling at 10.30am on Monday.
At the hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, Raza Husain KC, for Al-Haq, said the case came 'against the backdrop of human calamity' in Gaza, describing the conflict as a 'live-streamed genocide'.
In written submissions, he said that the Government misunderstood relevant parts of the Geneva Conventions when there was a clear risk that the parts might be used to commit or facilitate violations of international humanitarian law by Israel.
F-35s are part of an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets, with the UK contributing components for both assembly lines and an international pool.
An earlier hearing in the case was told that the decision to 'carve out' licences related to F-35 components followed advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'.
In written submissions for the May hearing, Sir James Eadie KC, for the Government, said that this 'provided justification to take exceptional measures to avoid these impacts and was consistent with the UK's domestic and international legal obligations'.
He continued that some of Al-Haq's criticisms 'are not based on a balanced appreciation of the facts' and did not consider 'the true depth and range of the information-gathering and analysis' by the Government when it made the decision.
Charities Oxfam and Amnesty International, as well as Human Rights Watch, all intervened in the case.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
37 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Minister quizzed on PIP welfare U-turn - 'How on earth did it get to this point'
In a dramatic climbdown on Thursday, Keir Starmer agreed to protect all existing claimants from losing Personal Independence Payments. But he still faces a major rebellion A government minister has been quizzed on Keir Starmer's U-turn on cuts to disability benefits after a bruising week for the Prime Minister. Skills Minister Baroness Jacqui Smith was pressed after the government was forced last week to introduce major concessions to avoid a humiliating Commons defeat. In a dramatic climbdown on Thursday, the PM agreed to protect all existing claimants from losing Personal Independence Payments. The changes to PIP will now only apply to new claims from November 2026. But Mr Starmer is still facing a rebellion at tomorrow's crunch vote, with as many as 50-60 Labour MPs still said to be considering voting against the government. It would be the biggest revolt of Mr Starmer's premiership so far. Appearing on BBC Breakfast, Baroness Smith was told: "It's quite a bruising week for the government. Looking at it now, how on earth did it get to this point?" The ex-Home Secretary replied: "What I think is important is what we're going to be starting tomorrow is really important reform of a broken welfare system. "Welfare reform is always difficult and I think actually the engagement that;s happened with Labour MPs, who are rightly bringing the concerns of their constituents about how this reform is going to work, have made this legislation better." Baroness Smith also said she hoped that Labour MPs will "feel able to support" the government at tomorrow's crunch vote after the concessions announced last week. The minister also suggested it was not "constructive" to discuss potential punishments for MPs who may decide to rebel against Mr Starmer's welfare plans. Asked on Sky News what the consequences should be for Labour MPs who vote against the government on the matter, she said: "I don't think talking about punishments, even as a former chief whip, is the constructive way forward here." She later added: "It's always the case in legislation that you introduce the Bill, you have a second reading on the principles, and then you think about the details as you take that through all of its stages in Parliament. I'm sure that that will continue to happen." But speaking on Monday the Labour MP Clive Efford said he still will not support the welfare bill even after the Government made concessions. He told the Today Programme on BBC Radio 4: "I think there are a lot of people waiting to hear what the Government is saying today who may be inclined to accept what the Government has done. READ MORE: MPs on fence ahead of crunch welfare vote as 'costs facing disabled people soar' "For me the situation hasn't changed for those people who will be adversely affected and until we know and understand the impact on them, we shouldn't be taking what I think is a leap in the dark." He added: "There are choices that the Government can make here; there are other places it can go to identify the resources. What we want to see, and fully support, is measures the Government is putting in the palace to assist people to move into work, the right to try, we support, but we can't guarantee the savings. "When you're asking for £3.5 billion regardless of the impact of those changes that can only adversely affect people who are in the benefit system. We cannot make assumptions about how much we can save in the welfare system ahead of actually bringing in those changes and seeing how they work." Plans for a major review of PIP will also be set out today, which will be co-produced by disabled people, organisations who represent them and MPs. It is hoped that the terms of the review - which will place disabled people at the heart of it - will persuade nervous MPs that the legislation is now heading in the right direction.
The Guardian
40 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Senior home affairs official abused public office to get her future brother-in-law a job, Nacc finds
A senior home affairs department official has been found to have abused public office and misused internal information to get her future brother-in-law a job, including hiding their relationship and sharing job interview questions with her sister. A damning National Anti-Corruption Commission report released on Monday found the woman, who was given the pseudonym Joanne Simeson, forged a signature and coached her sister on how to hide the family relationship, eliciting suspicions from colleagues involved in the recruitment process. The report into the Nacc's Operation Kingscliff said Simeson, who at the time was the acting assistant secretary overseeing the department's global initiatives branch, had resigned from the public service before she could be terminated. While at home affairs, she praised her sister's partner to colleagues, created a job requisition, approved it herself and forged a witness signature on paperwork to fast-track the process. The woman's sister, known as Melissa in the report, was employed overseas. Her husband, known as Mark, studied while living overseas. Joanne sought Mark's resume for the job application in late 2022 and told her sister an assistant secretary was eager to conduct a job interview. 'We'll talk [Mark] through the lie,' she wrote in a text message. Her sister responded: '… he's so bad at lying he's too honest.' 'Well he's gonna have to do better or I'll get in trouble,' Joanne said. Melissa replied: 'Yes good say that and scare him haha.' Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email In March 2023, when Joanne put her Mark forward for another role in the department, a staff member asked if he would be suitable for the role, saying 'just want to check as his CV alone does not make him an obvious choice'. She called him a 'friend of a friend' and said he should 'play along' with the lie. 'Also I'm the boss so they will do whatever I say,' she told her sister. A colleague involved in the recruitment process said Joanne's interest in the role was unusual, describing Mark as 'this dude in Italy'. They asked another staff member if there was a connection or if Joanne thought they were underperforming. After he was employed, Joanne told her sister she met Mark at the office. 'HAHAHAHAHA I JUST WENT TO HUG HIM THANK GOD HE STUCK HIS HAND OUT,' she wrote. Melissa replied: 'GAHAHAHAH … What a good boy he's such a good boy.' Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Nacc said her conduct was serious because of her seniority and 'because nepotism, cronyism and undeclared conflicts of interest in APS recruitment are an area of widespread concern'. Submissions made on the woman's behalf said she had not received any workplace training on recruitment, had not had ongoing conflict of interest training and did not give proper and due consideration to her decision not to disclose the familial relationship. She was described as being very remorseful. The Nacc commissioner, Paul Brereton, said nepotism and cronyism were among the most frequently observed corrupt behaviours reported to the commission. The corruption finding is the first publicly completed investigation by Nacc, which was established in June 2023. Separately on Monday, a former home affairs immigration officer was sentenced for abuse of public office, after approving a visa application for her brother-in-law, and for causing unauthorised access to restricted data related to 17 people. The man had his application for a visitor visa refused in November 2019. About 16 minutes after he reapplied, the employee self-allocated the case to herself as the visa decision-maker. She was sentenced to eight months imprisonment, but will be released immediately to serve a 12-month good behaviour bond and pay a $10,000 fine.
North Wales Chronicle
an hour ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Llinos Medi: MP on her first year representing Ynys Môn
In the 12 months that have passed since her election, she has repeatedly urged the Government for clarity on its plans for a new nuclear power station on the island at Wylfa, requested emergency government support after the Port of Holyhead's closure due to storm damage, called for devolution of the Crown Estate in Wales, voted in favour of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, and made her debut appearance on BBC's Question Time. Reporter Matthew Chandler met Ms Medi last week to reflect on her first year in Parliament. LM: It's quite amazing how quickly the year has gone. I would say in this last week or so, I've started to feel like I've got my head around the building, the expectations of me in the chamber, and of the mechanisms of this place. But it's about how you strike the balance, because I am here to represent my constituents, and when the workload is so heavy here, and you're not in your constituency enough, that isn't good, either. Sometimes, constituents contact me wanting to meet with me, and I've got to push them back a few weeks. I'm uncomfortable about that, especially when they're about serious matters. I still feel new here, and I think I'll still feel new for the next three years. Llinos Medi (first from left) with her Plaid Cymru colleagues in Westminster (Image: Submitted) LM: It's totally dependent on the workload here. The last three weeks, I've been in London much more than on the island. I've had to make decisions to go home midweek to meet some constituents who had serious matters that I needed to speak to them about. So, it's been quite challenging to get the balance right. Sometimes, you make the decision to stay in London, and then you're in the chamber for four hours and are not called to speak, so you've not been able to contribute. Being on Ynys Môn is really important, because I need to be able to be in touch with the people on the island. LM: I would say the amount of emails and casework we get at the moment shows that we are accessible. We have had lots of good outcomes through our casework for individuals on the island. We have surgeries, and have tried to arrange them in small rural villages, as well - not just the towns - so that people there feel they're accessible to them, too. Also, the fact that I live on the island, I know the people there, I've brought up my children there, I've spent 43 years there… hopefully, that increases accessibility, as well. LM: There was one piece of casework where the outcome on someone's quality of life was dramatic. She worked for a charity and had asked for support for some work she was doing. I was at an event, and this individual came up to me and just gave me a massive hug. I had to hold back tears, because I knew my team and I were able to have a dramatic impact on somebody's future. There have been other instances; somebody came to me and thanked me for helping with his benefits - his words were: 'I've been trying for 10 months, and you've sorted it in 10 days.' There are other stories, where you meet people for whom the system just hasn't worked. They're trying so, so hard to succeed in life, but every barrier has been put in front of them, and the state hasn't supported them. Obviously, I have empathy for them. Sometimes, people have just said to me: 'It's so nice that you understand how I feel.' One person said: 'You've given me the strength to be able to just battle through for a few more weeks. It isn't about social media, or having pictures taken, it's about having that direct impact on someone's quality of life. It's a team approach. I've got an amazing team on the island; my staff are very experienced, so I'm really, really lucky. Having that knowledge of what's going on in your constituency impacts what you say and do here in London, and definitely motivates you more. It's always the most vulnerable who usually don't have a voice. I want to make sure they feel they have somewhere to turn to, and someone who can support them. LM: Definitely. We all understand that the spend is increasing, and that we need to manage that. I totally get that. But you don't take away a lifeline and expect people to just be able to manage. That's ridiculous. Plaid Cymru have opposed Labour's welfare plans from the start, as we could see the dramatic impact they would have on our communities. Poverty exists in our communities, and disabled people feel its effects worse than anyone else. We know poverty is worse in Wales, and is 10 per cent higher among disabled people than in England. Some people use Personal Independence Payment (PIP) to plug the gap for housing allowance, so what you might have is more homeless people - so the state will be paying for homelessness. They are trying to make out that they're going to make these savings, but in reality, it will cost more in the end. They're talking about getting people into work, but there's no clear plan about how they're going to help the employers to give those jobs. I just find it really short-sighted. It just looks like sums on a paper, without any work done on the impact and the additional costs. It's giving with one hand and taking away with the other. It's not just for people out of work, either. Some people use their PIP to pay for public transport to get to work. We asked for a Welsh impact assessment because of the deprivation in Wales. Especially in areas like ours, where maybe some of the jobs are just seasonal work, it isn't as easy as they make out. LM: Devolving the Crown Estate would just give us parity with Scotland. It gives you an extra lever on how you want to spend. By 2029, child poverty will be at nearly 35 per cent in Wales. One country in the UK where it's coming down is Scotland - it'll be 19 per cent by 2029. We've seen Wales' natural resources being drained from our communities, and the profits going with it… the only thing that we're asking for is that we have the profits in our hands, to be able to spend them in a way that will benefit our communities, and poverty is one of them for us that could have a dramatic impact. Child poverty is just one example of what you could do with that. It is a problem for us all, because where children are in poverty, their educational outcomes are lower, so it becomes a long-term issue. The government has tried to say that devolution of the Crown Estate would fragment the market. My amendment was for a two-year transition, anyway, and Scotland hasn't seen any fragmentation of the market. This is a very weak argument. What they do know is that Wales will be producing a lot of energy, but they want the profits to go back to the treasury. LM: I'd say that's quite challenging, because you've still got that same narrative there. I was speaking to a young person last weekend who had lost his job, and his initial thought was: 'Oh gosh, I'm going to have to move away.' But when he started looking, he got a job instantly (on Ynys Môn). LM: I did - it was because of this narrative. I think we've told our young people to think in that way. We need to make sure that everything is aligned on the island for our young people. You will still hear me going on about Wylfa. I'm on the nuclear energy All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) and the small modular reactors APPG, and I'm vice-chair of the marine energy APPG because of Morlais (tidal energy project). I'm still in contact with the local authority, Stena Line and the Freeport, and am constantly in contact with Menai Science Park (M-SParc). LM: The decision on Sizewell C (a £14.2billion Suffolk nuclear plant given the go-ahead by the government in early June) is a positive step forward, because this government has shown they are in support of new nuclear, and have made financial decisions to show that support. What I'm still doing now is pushing the government to give us a clear indication on what they think is going to happen at the site so that we can prepare ourselves. If Wylfa comes, I want to make sure that we as an island, and also North Wales, maximise the benefits of the development. To do that, we need to work together and plan ahead. The skills side is one thing, the supply chain is another. How do we make sure that local businesses can get into the supply chain, and can benefit and thrive? They can offer apprenticeships and grow as businesses, as well. We just need that clear indication from the government that they will develop on Wylfa, and then we need a timeframe. As it is, people are disheartened. LM: I do now. The last question I asked Ed Miliband (secretary of state for energy security and net zero), I felt his response was much warmer towards me. The energy minister (Graham Stuart) has said himself in the chamber that I've raised this several times, so they definitely have heard me. I think I've been heard, but what we want is the government to understand the importance of giving us that clear indication, so we can plan ahead and can fully benefit from Wylfa when the decision is made. LM: I now have an office on the island which we struggled to get, and hopefully, it'll be opening soon. We've got a phone line, and our email system, but it's not an exaggeration to say we have thousands of emails. We try our best to be accessible. LM: I still feel, when I'm in that chamber representing Ynys Môn, that I've been given an amazing job to speak on behalf of its people. What I've got the most pride in is my accent. When I'm stood there, I think about the young children of Ynys Môn hearing their accent in that chamber. That's we why have democracy; so that we're represented by people from our communities.
