Are "Woke" Judges Interpreting UK's Commitments to Asylum-Seekers and Migrants Too Far?

In a scathing new book, a prominent legal expert argues that "woke" judges in the UK are over-interpreting the country's international commitments to asylum seekers and migrants. Dr Michael Arnheim contends that the UK has been taken over by a wave of "politically correct" judge-made law that undermines the power of Parliament.

A Call for a "Nuclear Option" and a Dad's Army Style Volunteer Force

In his book, titled "Fixing Human Rights Law," Dr Arnheim calls for a seismic solution to the issue. He argues that Members of Parliament should be granted the ability to "revoke," or cancel, any decision made by a British court, including the UK Supreme Court. Additionally, he proposes the creation of a volunteer force, reminiscent of Dad's Army, to patrol the English Channel and intercept small boats before they reach British waters.

The Jurisdiction Issue

The author believes that a proper reading of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights reveals that the UK and other signatory states are responsible only for the treatment of people "within their [own] jurisdiction." This implies that the UK does not hold the same level of responsibility for asylum seekers and migrants attempting to reach its shores.

The Impact on Asylum Backlog and Social Issues

An additional concern raised by Dr Arnheim is the impact these interpretations have on the asylum backlog in the UK. He argues that unless judges are reigned in, the backlog will never decrease. Furthermore, the author claims that the "immigration crisis, disruptive protests, and ruinous strikes" have been exacerbated by what he describes as woke lawyers and judges.

Judge-Made Law vs. Parliamentary Legislative Supremacy

Dr Arnheim asserts that the UK lacks the "Rule of Law," which should be characterized by clarity, predictability, and accessibility. Instead, he argues that the country is dominated by judge-made law, which directly contradicts the sovereignty of Parliament and the principle of parliamentary legislative supremacy, a core tenet of the British Constitution since 1689.

While Dr Arnheim's arguments are likely to spark debate, they shed light on concerns surrounding the key role judges play in interpreting UK commitments to asylum seekers and migrants. The call for a "nuclear option" and a volunteer force highlights the urgency some perceive in addressing these issues.