Latest news with #HermerKC
Yahoo
02-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Lord Hermer, it is remaining in the ECHR that imperils our human rights
For an eminent barrister to regret a 'clumsy' choice of words is rather like a distinguished heart surgeon owning up to being wobbly with a scalpel. Just as we ordinary folk expect pillars of the medical profession to be careful with our atrial chambers and pulmonary veins, so we pay Lord Hermer KC to be precise in language and wise in judgment. When the Attorney General delivers a setpiece speech that is the exact opposite, forcing him to make amends for having compared anyone who questions our membership of certain international conventions to a Nazi jurist, then he is advertising his own incompetence. As it happens, I wrote speeches for three Foreign Secretaries and one Prime Minister and even I could work out that it was best to avoid 1930s or Nazi references. Apart from my stubborn belief that Basil Fawlty was not a model of public oratory, the inevitable row would obliterate the message of the speech. And what was Lord Hermer's message? I want to be fairer than he deserves and concentrate on his argument because I think he was trying to be reassuring. After 32 years at the Bar, he may even have changed his mind about something. Lord Hermer is trying to swim with the tide created by the Defence Review, published on Monday, which confirms plans to increase military spending to match the most perilous international situation arguably since 1945. It may sound strange but the Attorney General is re-positioning himself as, if not a hawk, then at least a realist. He denounced 'legal romantic idealists' for being 'dangerously naive' and willing to confine Britain to 'irrelevance in global affairs'. Instead, he argued that loyalty to international law was consistent with a 'hard-headed' approach to British interests in a dangerous world. Lord Hermer failed to repeat a doctrine he outlined last year that Britain must not just obey international law but 'go further than simply meeting our obligations' – surely the essence of 'legal romantic idealism'. But that was all of seven months ago; the new Lord Hermer no longer entertains such purism. He even thinks that treaties should be subjected to 'evidence-based criticism' and 'proposals to reform' while international organisations must avoid 'blindness or indifference to public sentiment in their member states'. When a human rights barrister shows sympathy for public sentiment, you know that something is afoot. Ironically enough, Lord Hermer's speech was his attempt to be moderate. He was trying to occupy the middle ground between 'romantic idealists' on the one hand and 'pseudo-realists' on the other, the latter being people who supposedly want to do away with international law altogether. But there is a problem: he doesn't mean it. Look at the asymmetry of his language: the idealists are naive, but the 'pseudo-realists' are imitating Nazis. And he stubbornly evades two central questions. Is it still the Government's position that Britain must go further than just obey international law? Or is that an example of Old Hermer-ism that is no longer operative? More seriously, why is it always wrong – even shocking – to withdraw from an international convention? They all provide for states to depart. Why would exercising that right imperil the whole system? Lord Hermer thinks that his critics want to 'pick and mix', breaking some elements of international agreements and obeying others. But if that were true, there would be no point withdrawing from any convention: we would just ignore them. The fact that Robert Jenrick wants to leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) does not make him an enemy of the rule of law. It just means that he wants to use the procedure for withdrawal in Article 58 because he believes that continued membership no longer serves the British people. What is so wrong with that? For example, the British people have a security interest in their government being able to deport foreign nationals who commit serious offences. Keeping them here, no matter how dangerous they might be, breaches the state's obligation to protect its own people. Yet the courts have interpreted the ECHR in a way that effectively compels us to keep many foreign national offenders. Articles 3 and 8, which respectively prohibit torture and guarantee family life, are routinely used to defeat the state's attempts to deport them. Some go on to re-offend. Foreigners who avoided deportation committed 10,000 crimes in Britain in one year, 2021-22, according to Ministry of Justice data. That is 10,000 avoidable human rights abuses. Why is it wrong to observe that membership of the ECHR collides with the right of people in the United Kingdom not to fall prey to foreign criminals who could otherwise have been expelled? Is placing membership of the ECHR above the safety of the British public not a 'pick and mix' approach, and a pretty reprehensible one? Meanwhile, five European countries, including Finland and Poland, are withdrawing from the Ottawa Convention of 1997 which bans anti-personnel landmines. They believe they need these weapons to deter Russian invasion. Are they vandalising the international system? Should Britain be campaigning against their decision? I see no sign that we are. If our allies are allowed to leave a convention because it no longer serves their national interest, why can't we? After all, the biggest catastrophe for Finland and Poland would be a failure to deter Russian aggression. A smaller but still grave catastrophe here in Britain was 10,000 avoidable human rights abuses in one year, particularly if you happened to be one of the victims. If you insist on remaining in every convention regardless of the consequences, isn't that more extreme and irresponsible than exercising the legal right to leave? Will you not open the way for politicians who might respond 'stay in the conventions, but just ignore them'. Lord Hermer might be trying to re-brand himself as a moderate, but by placing membership of international conventions beyond question, he endangers what he wishes to preserve. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Spectator
30-05-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
Lord Hermer is preposterously wrong about international law
Lord Hermer KC has done it again. Delivering RUSI's annual security lecture this week, the Attorney General set out to 'depolarise' the debate about international law, before promptly comparing those who are open to withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) with Carl Schmitt, the notorious German jurist who joined the Nazi party in 1933. If Lord Hermer's intention truly was to lower the political temperature, and to help to broaden the base of support for the government's approach to international law, his speech must be judged a failure. Perhaps his choice of words was simply clumsy, as he has since said, although the text as a whole suggests otherwise. The Attorney's speech mentions Schmitt, and a Schmittian approach to the rule of law, four times, linking him not only to the Nazis but also to Putin's aggression against Ukraine.
The Independent
14-02-2025
- The Independent
Southport killer's sentence will not be referred for appeal
The Southport child killer's sentence will not be referred to the Court of Appeal, the Attorney General has said. Axel Rudakubana, 18, was jailed for minimum of 52 years in January, after murdering three girls at a dance class, but the sentence sparked criticism from a family involved in the attack and MPs, alongside calls for law changes. Rudakubana received one of the highest minimum custody terms on record for the attack, at a Taylor Swift-themed class in the Merseyside town in July last year, when he was 17. He killed Alice da Silva Aguiar, nine, Bebe King, six, and Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, and attempted to murder eight other children, who cannot be named for legal reasons, class instructor Leanne Lucas and businessman John Hayes. On Friday Attorney General Lord Hermer KC said he would not be referring the sentence to the Court of Appeal under the unduly lenient sentence scheme. In a statement, Lord Hermer said: 'The senseless and barbaric murder of three young girls in Southport last summer shocked our nation. 'No words come anywhere close to expressing the brutality and horror in this case. 'It was understandable that we received multiple requests to review the sentence under the unduly lenient sentence scheme, which is designed to identify and remedy gross errors made by judges. 'After careful consideration of independent legal advice and consultation with leading criminal barristers and the Crown Prosecution Service, I have concluded that this case cannot properly be referred to the Court of Appeal. 'No-one would want the families to be put through an unnecessary further court process where there is no realistic legal basis for an increased sentence. 'The 52-year sentence imposed by the judge was the second longest sentence imposed by the courts in English history. 'Rudakubana will likely never be released and will spend the rest of his life in jail. 'The Government have set out the next steps that must now take place to ensure that these awful murders will be a line in the sand. 'My thoughts today are with the friends and families of Bebe, Elsie and Alice, as well as the other victims – your memories will not be forgotten.' Southport's MP, Patrick Hurley, previously asked the Attorney General to review the killer's sentence as 'unduly lenient', saying it is 'not severe enough'. A parent of one of the children who survived the attack, who cannot be named because the victim has been granted anonymity by the court, previously told The Sun that Rudakubana's crimes were so horrific that he should 'rot in jail' and the 'law needs changing'. The 52-year sentence imposed by the judge was the second longest sentence imposed by the courts in English history. Rudakubana will likely never be released and will spend the rest of his life in jail Attorney General Lord Hermer KC After the sentencing, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, backed by shadow home secretary Chris Philp, said there was a 'strong case' for amending the law to allow for whole-life orders to be imposed on people aged under 18 in some cases, which the Tories 'will start to explore'. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said at the time that the 'vile offender will likely never be released'. Rudakubana's punishment is thought to be the longest imposed on a killer of his age. He cannot legally receive a whole-life order, a punishment reserved for offenders aged 21 and over or, in rare cases, those aged 18 to 20, because of his age at the time of the attack. The PA news agency understands the families of the children Rudakubana murdered have been informed of the Attorney General's decision. Harrowing evidence of the injuries suffered by the girls during the attack at The Hart Space was read out during a hearing at Liverpool Crown Court, with Bebe suffering a total of 122 sharp force injuries and Elsie being subjected to 85. Rudakubana, who was born in Cardiff, also admitted possession of a knife, production of a biological toxin, ricin, and possession of information likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing to commit an act of terrorism. Three separate referrals were made to the Government's anti-terror programme, Prevent, about Rudakubana's behaviour in the years before the attack, as well as six separate calls to police. Last month the Government announced a public inquiry into the stabbings, with Chancellor Rachel Reeves saying the probe would need to establish Prevent's approach to determining ideology and what it regards as terror. Unrest erupted across the country in the wake of the attack, with mosques and hotels used for asylum seekers among the locations targeted, after false information spread online which claimed the suspect was an asylum seeker who had arrived in the UK on a small boat. More than 1,000 arrests linked to disorder across the country have since been made and hundreds of people have been charged and jailed.
