Things don’t turn out the way they are supposed to, do they? The international structures put in place after World War II offer unhappy evidence. The United Nations, for instance, originally utopian in inspiration, on balance does more harm than good. Signed in 1950, the European Convention on Human Rights arose from a similar generous impulse to hold at bay the tyranny that Communism then appeared to be spreading across the continent. Implementing the Convention and its huge range of human rights, the so-called European Court of Human Rights in Strasburg has evolved into a supreme judicial body for members of the European Union. In 2000, Tony Blair, then prime minister, passed the Human Rights Act, bringing into British law all the protections specified in the European Convention. Put truthfully, he was sacrificing national sovereignty. British history rests on the fact that the law has always been in the hands of Parliament. That was over and done with. European judges could now dictate to Parliament.
The identity of a nation derives from its language, currency, and law. The English language is an imperial force everywhere. The twists of domestic politics prevented Blair from realizing his intention to replace sterling with the euro. No doubt he visualized the supremacy of the European Court over British law as a progressive step towards converting the British into good Europeans. Instead, two systems of law now operate, the one in opposition to the other, with the inevitable consequence that justice is not done, the whole judicial process has become disreputable, crime goes unpunished, the man in the street is enraged, and government is a laughing stock.
A sample of perpetrators who could not be deported on account of the Human Rights Act includes a Sudanese man who raped a twelve-year-old girl; a Taliban who had shot and killed British soldiers; and a man illegally smuggled into the country who dealt drugs and had children by two different women, neither of whom he lived with. In a recent case, a 53-year-old Libyan successfully argued that he was an alcoholic and would be punished and imprisoned in his own country where alcohol is illegal. Judge Jonathan Perkins ruled that to return him home would “interfere disproportionately with his private and family life.” This Perkins of ours, and others lining up with him, are grave-diggers rather than judges.
In his first term in office, David Cameron promised to hold a referendum on Britain’s continuing membership of the European Union. Re-elected, he further promises to abolish the human rights legislation imported from Europe. It is a grim measure of decline that he is going to have to do battle with quite a large number of people, apparently some Conservatives among them, who oppose the recovery of national sovereignty.