Rather than answering on my Facebook page, which isn't the best of mediums to deal with at times, I thought I'd point everyone at an article printed in the Metro yesterday which explains things quite concisely. An extract:
"So, why doesn’t Britain just ignore the ruling and expel Qatada? The reason is Britain played a central role in the creation of the Convention on Human Rights, which the court applies, and is keen to be seen as an advocate of human rights.
In other words, going against the European Court of Human Rights would be somewhat hypocritical, while making it harder for Britain to tell other nations what to do – and what not to do. ‘Getting governments to implement and respect rulings by the court is crucial if the system is to work effectively,’ said Benjamin Ward, of Human Rights Watch"
More on this story http://www.metro.co.uk/news/891664-why-britain-cant-deport-abu-qatada-back-to-jordan#ixzz1nlWcLuow
Understandably people are very angry about this issue, and the Daily Mail claims that the UK plans to try and claw back power from the European Court of Human Rights.
The only way to escape the rulings of the EU is to let the people of this country decide whether they want a continued role in this expensive members club. Campaign for a Referendum is continuing to push the government for an overdue referendum on whether we continue with our EU membership or whether we take the decision to leave. You can sign the Government E-Petition at the following link http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/20911 . For further information on the Campaign and what you can do to help, please visit www.HaveYourSay.eu
