11 November 2021
Die Versicherheitlichung und Kriminalisierung von Migration und Asyl in Großbritannien
Die 'Nationality and Borders Bill' stellt den Höhepunkt der zunehmend sicherheitsorientierten, kriminalisierten und feindlichen Haltung der britischen Regierung gegenüber Asyl und Migration dar. Der 11. September verfestigte den höchst zweifelhaften Zusammenhang zwischen Migration und Terrorismus, der noch heute von einigen in der Regierung hergestellt wird. In der Zwischenzeit hatte die britische Regierung jahrzehntelang eine restriktive Migrationspolitik und -praxis betrieben, die jetzt neue Extreme annimmt. Continue reading >>
0 
11 November 2021
The UK’s Securitisation and Criminalisation of Migration and Asylum
The Nationality and Borders Bill is the culmination of the UK government’s increasingly securitised, criminalised and hostile approach to asylum and migration. While 9/11 served to solidify the highly dubious nexus between migration and terrorism, the UK (alongside other destination states) has for decades been implementing restrictive migration policies and practices designed to deter and prevent asylum seekers and other migrants from reaching its territories and accessing safety. Continue reading >>
0
05 October 2021
Brexit, Labour Shortages and Structures of Exploitation
Even though there were warnings that labour shortages would follow Brexit, the UK Government did not put sufficient plans in place between 2016 and 2021, to prevent the current crisis that many predicted. Now, the UK Government is attempting to address the problem in two different ways: first, by introducing temporary visas for migrant workers; second, by employing prisoners and other offenders to cover shortages. However, for migrant workers or prisoners to work in fair conditions, radical change of the legal framework is needed. Continue reading >>
0
24 June 2021
The Northern Ireland Protocol “Sausage Wars”
Five years after the Brexit referendum, the legal stalemate on the Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland the impasse between the UK and the EU continues, despite the conclusion of the Withdrawal Agreement and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. While the concept of “state civil disobedience” could be applied to the UK government’s actions since, this is an inappropriate means to conceptualise the conflict. Instead, the more familiar concept of legally justified exceptions to obligations would have been a more appropriate means of pre-empting the dispute during the creation of the Protocol. Continue reading >>31 March 2021
Principled Generosity Mixed with Unmanaged Market
The EU is experiencing internal dissatisfaction at its inability to supply Member States with enough Covid-19 vaccines, while other countries – notably the UK – are racing ahead of it towards the end of the pandemic. Much criticism of the EU is unfair. It is being compared with countries that have shown more brutal and unashamed vaccine nationalism, but it should be proud that it has not gone down this path. By contrast, its role as global and regional vaccine supplier should not hide the fact that it has been too slow to recognize that vaccine sales cannot be left to the free market, while the Member States should not be allowed to hide their absence of leadership, initiative or organization behind critique of the EU. Continue reading >>30 March 2021
Hercules comes to Scotland
In a landmark case, the Outer House of the Court of Session in Scotland on 24 March 2021 declared that the closure of worship places in Scotland was a disproportionate interference with the right to freedom of religion and freedom of assembly under article 9(2) and 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights. The judgment is as an example of anxious scrutiny in judicial review of administrative action in the pandemic context. His consideration of the evidence concerning closure of worship places strikes as well documented and highly demanding assessment. Given the exceptional circumstances in which governments are crafting their emergency responses to the pandemic, pitching proportionality assessments as Lord Braid does is concerning. Continue reading >>
0
19 March 2021
A Tricky Move
The European Commission’s decision to commence legal proceedings against the United Kingdom for unilaterally extending certain grace periods for the movement of goods in contravention to the Northern Ireland Protocol is legally sound, but politically tricky. In legal terms, the decision to launch both infringement proceedings and take first steps towards arbitration is the most promising avenue towards UK compliance with the Protocol. Yet it brings with it a political risk of further escalating the tensions around the Protocol within Northern Ireland and between the EU and the UK. Continue reading >>
0
15 July 2020
The Chinese threat we forgot about: Huawei and ISDS
During the era of coronavirus emergency, the words China and threat tend to suggest the origin of our common affliction. The world to emerge from coronavirus however will face both new challenges and the echo of old ones. An old problem is what to do about Chinese involvement in 5G infrastructure development. In light of the recent ban for Huawei equipment by the UK this post addresses the question of whether the Chinese multinational Huawei would have an investment claim against the German government were they to prohibit its participation in 5G deployment. Continue reading >>
0
17 April 2020
Right Restriction or Restricting Rights? The UK Acts to Address COVID-19
The UK initially downplayed concerns arising from the spread of COVID-19: Prime Minister Boris Johnson suggesting Britain should ‘take it on the chin’, pursued a policy which introduced no significant measures beyond encouraging hand-washing for 20 seconds. This changed, abruptly, on 12 March. On the same day schools and businesses were shut in Ireland and France, and three days after Italy was locked down, Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced a move to the delay phase and advised, though did not direct, over-70s to stay home, and travellers to avoid cruises. People should ‘avoid pubs and restaurants’, but they would not be closed. Large gatherings, such as the Cheltenham Festival, would not be prevented from going ahead. On 19 March following the rapid spread of the virus, the government announced that there was ‘zero prospect’ of a lockdown in London which would place limits on peoples’ movement. Four days later, on 23 March, the capital entered lockdown along with the rest of the country. ‘Zero prospect’ had lasted less than four days. Continue reading >>21 March 2020
Fighting COVID 19 – Legal Powers and Risks: The United Kingdom
The United Kingdom’s response to the coronavirus epidemic is still in its early stages, but seems likely to – eventually – involve a wide range of the emergency powers currently available to the state, as well as some which do not yet exist. Nonetheless, it already seems inevitable that the success of the state’s response to Coronavirus will eventually be judged not only by the nature of the interferences with individual liberty carried out, but also – and perhaps primarily – by the sufficiency of the associated economic measures. Continue reading >>
0