Photo: BBC
Well reasoned judgement which stops government from doing much damage to the country:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-legal-challenge-statement-full-read-judgement-summary-high-court-theresa-may-article-50-a7395071.html
UK, even with laws prohibiting various crimes (such as racially motivated ones), managed to get away many times due to European institution's(s) laxity i.e. being partial to UK administration.
Following BREXIT referendum where majority of those who voted were against staying in European Union, vulnerable (Europeans) people suffered even more discrimination. Some people were simply killed. Many harassed and damaged in various ways. Europeans of all colours did notice the change in the air. And, yes, there are always some who are in denial.
EU laws provided tiny breaks on nasty people and going forward with Brexit without reference to Parliament would mean laws based on EU laws would be eliminated. Just like that. No discussion of the implications. It took many, many years before British thought about making anti-corruption laws. Yes, government signs a declaration but then leaves it at that.
Human rights as natural instinct of British? Is there any such evidence in people after years of being subjected to education (for example, religious indoctrination in schools and outside) that eliminates normal sense of justice, accountability and equality as well as being subjected to the agents of the state who fail to enforce the law as they should. See, for example, just what courts did to whistleblowers in UK if you are interested in freedom of speech.
Well, today, there is some hope that at least a number of people are healthy enough in body and mind to fight back nastiness. It is not just one party that changes the law, it is Parliament.
And can one have free market to oneself without others agreeing? No.
No comments:
Post a Comment