Top judge corrects media

International court did not decide that claim of genocide in Gaza was plausible

New post, free to read: rozenberg.substack.com/p/top-judge-co…

This is the full statement that the Government has made (as it was required to do under s20(8) of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010) about why it is ratifying the Rwanda treaty - in spite of the motion in the House of Lords not to do so.

Rwanda: what next in the courts? My analysis of possible legal challenges
instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/explai…

My latest piece for the The Spectator questions whether Rishi Sunak has merely achieved a pyrrhic victory in getting his Rwanda Bill through Parliament:

spectator.co.uk/article/the-rw…

'If there is a full hearing before the European Court of Human Rights, I would be astonished if the Court upheld the legality of the Rwanda scheme.'

✍️ Alexander Horne spectator.co.uk/article/the-rw…

This degree of media attention on parliamentary ping-pong for a Bill is unusual. So important to stress that it is a standard, normal part of the legislative scrutiny process. What is unusual (historically, tho not in recent years) is the Govt's intransigent attitude to amdts.