Latest news with #RichardHermer
The Independent
2 days ago
- General
- The Independent
Oh dear, m'lud: It's never a good idea to call people Nazis if they are not Nazis
Godwin's Law states that, as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 100 per cent. A corollary to the law is that the first person to mention the Nazis loses the argument. So it is surprising that Richard Hermer, the attorney general, should make that mistake. He said in a lecture on Thursday: 'The claim that international law is fine as far as it goes, but can be put aside when the conditions change, is a claim that was made in the early 1930s by 'realist' jurists in Germany – most notably Carl Schmitt, whose central thesis was in essence the claim that state power is all that counts.' Schmitt supported Hitler's rule by decree in 1933, bypassing the German constitution. Hermer went on: 'Our approach is a rejection of the siren song, that can sadly now be heard in the Palace of Westminster, not to mention the press, that Britain abandon the constraints of international law in favour of raw power.' Oops. He referred in his lecture to Kemi Badenoch's plan to 'disengage' from the European Court of Human Rights if necessary to protect British interests, and made it clear that this was part of the 'pick and mix' approach that he was condemning. The backpedalling was almost immediate. Sources 'close to' Lord Hermer insisted that he was not likening Badenoch or Nigel Farage to Nazis, and pointed out that he also said in the lecture that those who advocated repudiating treaties were 'patriots' who were doing so in 'good faith'. A spokesperson for Lord Hermer has now also issued a statement, apologising for his 'clumsy' choice of words. Too late. Another corollary of Godwin's Law – named in 1990 after Mike Godwin, an American lawyer who took part in Usenet newsgroup discussions in the early days of the internet – is that, once made, a comparison to the Nazis is difficult to unmake. The significance of Hermer's blooper is twofold. One is that he is like the Ghost of Starmer Past, a reminder that the prime minister was a human rights barrister too before before he was captured by Morgan McSweeney, his chief of staff, who reprogrammed him according to the overriding need to win votes. The other is that Hermer, as the government's chief legal adviser, in effect holds a veto on the home secretary's review of the application of human rights law. Yvette Cooper said in March that the government was reviewing the way the European Convention on Human Rights – including Article 8, the right to family life – is applied, 'to make sure that the immigration and asylum system works effectively in the way that parliament intended it to and make sure that there is a proper sense of control in the system'. This review is part of the emerging consensus around Europe that human rights law needs to be reformed. Indeed, Hermer is part of that consensus, saying in his lecture that Britain 'must be ready to reform' international agreements such as the European Convention on Human Rights so that they retain 'democratic legitimacy'. Nine EU leaders, led by the prime ministers of Italy and Denmark, published an open letter last week protesting that the court's interpretation of the convention 'has, in some cases, limited our ability to make political decisions in our own democracies'. They said: 'We have seen, for example, cases concerning the expulsion of criminal foreign nationals where the interpretation of the convention has resulted in the protection of the wrong people and posed too many limitations on the states' ability to decide whom to expel from their territories.' So Badenoch and Farage may be pushing at a door that is already opening. Farage advocates withdrawing from the European Court regardless, while Badenoch says that she would be prepared to withdraw from the European Court if it, and the application of convention rights by British courts, cannot be reformed. Rishi Sunak said the same. Even Jack Straw, the Labour former home secretary, asked in a letter to The Times two months ago: 'What utility is there in the UK being bound any more into the Strasbourg court? Not much, is my answer.' He said convention rights are 'safe enough' being enforced by British courts. This is an argument that the reformers are winning. It seems not only legitimate to keep open the option of withdrawing from the European Court, but to make good tactical sense, bringing pressure to bear on the Council of Europe that oversees it. The case for sensible reform risks being destroyed by Hermer's hyperbole about 1930s Germany. And the political argument against Farage is weakened by comparing his policy, however indirectly, to that of the Nazis. The prime minister should exorcise the unhelpful ghost of his past.
The Guardian
2 days ago
- General
- The Guardian
Attorney general apologises for comparing Tories and Reform to Nazis
The attorney general has apologised for a 'clumsy' remark that compared Conservative and Reform calls to disregard international treaties and quit the European convention of human rights with the early days of Nazi Germany. In a speech on Thursday, Richard Hermer defended the government's commitment to abide by international law and likened those who wanted to ignore it to German jurists in the 1930s such as Carl Schmitt. His words came under attack from Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage. Badenoch, the Tory leader, accused Lord Hermer of 'starting from a position of self-loathing, where Britain is always wrong and everyone else is right' and demanded an apology. 'Our sovereignty is being eroded by out-of-date treaties and courts acting outside their jurisdiction,' Badenoch posted on X. 'Pointing this out does not make anyone a Nazi. Labour have embarrassed themselves again with this comparison.' On Friday, a spokesperson for the attorney general said he acknowledged that 'his choice of words was clumsy and regrets having used this reference' but added that he 'rejects the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives'. 'The attorney general gave a speech defending international law, which underpins our security, protects against threats from aggressive states like Russia and helps tackle organised immigration crime,' the spokesperson said. Farage, the leader of Reform UK, has long campaigned for the UK to leave the ECHR. Badenoch said earlier this year that the UK may have to quit the convention and other international agreements if they stopped ministers from acting 'in our national interest'. Hermer said in his speech to the Royal United Services Institute: 'The claim that international law is fine as far as it goes, but can be put aside when conditions change, is a claim that was made in the early 1930s by 'realist' jurists in Germany, most notably Carl Schmitt, whose central thesis was in essence the claim that state power is all that counts, not law.' 'Because of the experience of what followed in 1933, far-sighted individuals rebuilt and transformed the institutions of international law, as well as internal constitutional law.' Adolf Hitler became chancellor of Germany in 1933. Schmitt was highly influential under the Nazis and wrote about sovereignty and the effective exercise of power without the constraint of legal norms. Hermer said the government's approach was 'a rejection of the siren song that can sadly now be heard in the Palace of Westminster, not to mention some sections of the media, that Britain abandon the constraints of international law in favour of raw power'. 'Let me be crystal clear: I do not question for a moment the good faith, let alone patriotism, of the pseudo-realists, but their arguments if ever adopted would provide succour to [Vladimir] Putin,' he said. In his same speech, Hermer argued that 'we must not stagnate in our approach to international rules' and 'must be ready to reform where necessary'.
Leader Live
2 days ago
- Politics
- Leader Live
Attorney General ‘regrets' comparing calls to leave ECHR with 1930s Germany
In a statement, Lord Richard Hermer's spokesman said the peer acknowledged his 'choice of words was clumsy' but rejected 'the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives'. Lord Hermer has faced criticism for a speech on Thursday in which he criticised politicians who argued that Britain 'abandons the constraints of international law in favour of raw power'. Arguing that similar claims had been made 'in the early 1930s by 'realist' jurists in Germany', Lord Hermer added that abandoning international law would only 'give succour to (Vladimir) Putin'. He also said that because of what happened 'in 1933, far-sighted individuals rebuilt and transformed the institutions of international law'. That is the year that Adolf Hitler became German chancellor. The speech prompted Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, who has suggested the UK would have to leave the ECHR if it stops the country from doing 'what is right', to accuse Lord Hermer of 'starting from a position of self loathing, where Britain is always wrong and everyone else is right'. In a post on social media, she said: 'The fact is laws go bad and need changing, institutions get corrupted. Our sovereignty is being eroded by out-of-date treaties and courts acting outside their jurisdiction. 'Pointing this out does not make anyone a Nazi. Labour have embarrassed themselves again with this comparison and unless the Prime Minister demands a retraction from his Attorney General, we can only assume these slurs reflect Keir Starmer's own view.' Lord Hermer's spokesman said: 'The Attorney General gave a speech defending international law which underpins our security, protects against threats from aggressive states like Russia and helps tackle organised immigration crime. 'He rejects the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives. He acknowledges though that his choice of words was clumsy and regrets having used this reference.' In his same speech to the Royal United Services Institute on Thursday, the Attorney General said 'we must not stagnate in our approach to international rules' and that officials should 'look to apply and adapt existing obligations to address new situations'. 'We must be ready to reform where necessary,' he added.
North Wales Chronicle
2 days ago
- Politics
- North Wales Chronicle
Attorney General ‘regrets' comparing calls to leave ECHR with 1930s Germany
In a statement, Lord Richard Hermer's spokesman said the peer acknowledged his 'choice of words was clumsy' but rejected 'the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives'. Lord Hermer has faced criticism for a speech on Thursday in which he criticised politicians who argued that Britain 'abandons the constraints of international law in favour of raw power'. Arguing that similar claims had been made 'in the early 1930s by 'realist' jurists in Germany', Lord Hermer added that abandoning international law would only 'give succour to (Vladimir) Putin'. He also said that because of what happened 'in 1933, far-sighted individuals rebuilt and transformed the institutions of international law'. That is the year that Adolf Hitler became German chancellor. The speech prompted Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, who has suggested the UK would have to leave the ECHR if it stops the country from doing 'what is right', to accuse Lord Hermer of 'starting from a position of self loathing, where Britain is always wrong and everyone else is right'. In a post on social media, she said: 'The fact is laws go bad and need changing, institutions get corrupted. Our sovereignty is being eroded by out-of-date treaties and courts acting outside their jurisdiction. 'Pointing this out does not make anyone a Nazi. Labour have embarrassed themselves again with this comparison and unless the Prime Minister demands a retraction from his Attorney General, we can only assume these slurs reflect Keir Starmer's own view.' Lord Hermer's spokesman said: 'The Attorney General gave a speech defending international law which underpins our security, protects against threats from aggressive states like Russia and helps tackle organised immigration crime. 'He rejects the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives. He acknowledges though that his choice of words was clumsy and regrets having used this reference.' In his same speech to the Royal United Services Institute on Thursday, the Attorney General said 'we must not stagnate in our approach to international rules' and that officials should 'look to apply and adapt existing obligations to address new situations'. 'We must be ready to reform where necessary,' he added.
South Wales Guardian
2 days ago
- Politics
- South Wales Guardian
Attorney General ‘regrets' comparing calls to leave ECHR with 1930s Germany
In a statement, Lord Richard Hermer's spokesman said the peer acknowledged his 'choice of words was clumsy' but rejected 'the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives'. Lord Hermer has faced criticism for a speech on Thursday in which he criticised politicians who argued that Britain 'abandons the constraints of international law in favour of raw power'. Arguing that similar claims had been made 'in the early 1930s by 'realist' jurists in Germany', Lord Hermer added that abandoning international law would only 'give succour to (Vladimir) Putin'. He also said that because of what happened 'in 1933, far-sighted individuals rebuilt and transformed the institutions of international law'. That is the year that Adolf Hitler became German chancellor. The speech prompted Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, who has suggested the UK would have to leave the ECHR if it stops the country from doing 'what is right', to accuse Lord Hermer of 'starting from a position of self loathing, where Britain is always wrong and everyone else is right'. In a post on social media, she said: 'The fact is laws go bad and need changing, institutions get corrupted. Our sovereignty is being eroded by out-of-date treaties and courts acting outside their jurisdiction. 'Pointing this out does not make anyone a Nazi. Labour have embarrassed themselves again with this comparison and unless the Prime Minister demands a retraction from his Attorney General, we can only assume these slurs reflect Keir Starmer's own view.' Lord Hermer's spokesman said: 'The Attorney General gave a speech defending international law which underpins our security, protects against threats from aggressive states like Russia and helps tackle organised immigration crime. 'He rejects the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives. He acknowledges though that his choice of words was clumsy and regrets having used this reference.' In his same speech to the Royal United Services Institute on Thursday, the Attorney General said 'we must not stagnate in our approach to international rules' and that officials should 'look to apply and adapt existing obligations to address new situations'. 'We must be ready to reform where necessary,' he added.
