Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Boris - The Prime Minister

First thoughts on PMBoris, will he make a difference?


  • Total voters
    610

HCL

Old-Salt
I don't really understand that. Are you saying that it's BJ who makes the decision whether or not an alleged infringement of international law made by his own government (ie himself) is put before the appropriate court?

That does not compute to me.

It's just the way it is, I believe. It's a sovereign power devolved to the PM. He's judge and jury on it.
 
It's not that important in the scheme of things, but why else did you identify me as a remainer?
It seems to have been an erroneous impression, perhaps simply by your objection to the use of a tactic, that may nullify what seems to have been an unreasonable attitude from the EU in the recent negotiations.

A tactic that the EU seems to have been guilty of when the circumstances did not suit them.

An attitude that has from the time we have been in the EU has been largely negative and generally dismissive, and, when it could have been settled with two previous PM’s to a far better situation than what they now face, was ignored and treated shabbily.

The EU’s behaviour to date has been uncooperative, rude, and quite frankly, hostile throughout. The threat to blockade food to N Ireland an unpleasant escalation of that hostility.

The fact that the UK might now take this step is probably the only way we will get a cleaner break than has so far been the case, and it to my mind a step that is worth taking.

But as stated before, I accept that many disagree, and again apologise for inadvertently labelling you as one of ‘them’. :)
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure who has initial jurisdiction for matters concerning international law (breaches, for the use of).

Generally, disputes in treaty law are resolved before the ICJ, subject to both sovereign parties providing consent. Parties to the overwhelming majority of modern treaties submit to the ICJ as the court of competent jurisdiction for dispute resolution or have an alternative, neutral, arbitration mechanism.

The challenge with disputes under the Withdrawal Agreement being heard by the ICJ is that the EU does not have standing (locus standi) before the ICJ as is not a sovereign nation. Individual MS do, but not the EU in its own capacity (being a supranational entity).

The EU, therefore, requires that the ECJ be the final and absolute arbiter of any dispute relating to the Withdrawal Agreement. The EU sees the ECJ as the sole and absolute authority on matters relating to EU law, and sees its judgements as being superior to those of the ICJ.

At the same time, the ECJ is renowned for its "creative jurisprudence", and has been a primary driver of back-door EU integration via judgement. It is this partisan judicial activism, i.e. making policy via judgement, that the UK necessarily seeks to avoid. Rather, the UK wishes to deal with disputes as "sovereign equals". Unfortunately, the EU is not a sovereign equal before the ICJ, so a third means of dispute resolution should be found (again, as is common in treaties).

This difficulty at "international law" is caused not by the UK.

Rather, it is caused by the EU, via a "creative" ECJ judgement, which stated that EU law is international law (see Van Gend en Loos v Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen).

The EU can be creative when it chooses, again with activist support from the ECJ. For those genuinely interested, research the inter-state dispute resolution mechanism under CETA.......where a new entity has been created to facilitate resolution. It is this dispute resolution mechanism that leads UK Gov to call for a "Canada style" arrangement, not the mundane nature of tariff reduction.
 
Last edited:
Er its called the FO and they can demand explanations, even if nothing satisfactory can be achieved at this stage, but lets not forget on teensy weensy little fact, from what we can glean, they released it, it's killed trade as we know it and it';s had a global effect.- Fundamentally that's considerably worse than the localised effect of a border war- oh and they have a vested interest in getting their way.

Ah, I've got it now, you think the Head Sheds of the PRC are going to jump when faced with 'demands' made by our Foreign Office.

Bless!
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
Well, Brandon Lewis seemed to think that international law would be broken. At least that what he told parliament. It seems that the government's most senior legal adviser shared that view and resigned.

I think that under those circumstances I'd say it's a fair bet that the courts may well become involved.

The Supreme Court's already ruled on the matter. If the Internal Market bill is enacted, it takes precedence.

Of course it would be rather jolly to find out which venal pieces of pondlife are still prepared to undermine the UK and parade their cant in an ostentatious display of deep concern for the sanctity of International Law which has been conspicuously absent hitherto and will be conspicuously absent hereafter.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
This has a ring of truth about it.

With respect, the only reason you think this article has a 'ring of truth' about it is that it panders to your vitriolic hatred of and prejudice against Boris Johnson. If he were to single-handedly come up with a cure for cancer, you would be desperately raking through the ether for a Tweet or an article saying he'd found the cure too late, and it's all a scam to kill immigrant cancer patients or something.

I quite like Toby Young, in general his articles are well written, informative, amusing and I often agree with his conclusions. However in this case I don't; whilst the PM has quite evidently not been firing on all cylinders since his brush with COVID, I have confidence that he will rally, looking at what he's managed to do since becoming PM (stonking majority, Brexit enacted, and despite the relentless bad press, a pretty effective defence of the economy through lockdown).

I am a subscriber to the Spectator, and have been for some time. I find it an essential read which helps me peek beyond the political curtain, but I don't consider its articles to be irrefutable or writ on stone tablets. IMHO this is just the editorial pendulum swinging to one extreme. Over the coming months (dependent on events dear boy), "Boris is awful, and must go" articles in the Speccy will be replaced by "Boris has some redeeming qualities", and then culminate "The old Boris is back!" ,before tipping back toward "Grave weaknesses in Boris's leadership".

Plus ca change.
 
Last edited:

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
With respect, the only reason you think this article has a 'ring of truth' about it is that it panders to your vitriolic hatred of and prejudice against Boris Johnson. If he were to single-handedly come up with a cure for cancer, you would be desperately raking through the ether for a Tweet or an article saying he'd found the cure too late, and it's all a scam to kill immigrant cancer patients or something.

I quite like Toby Young, in general his articles are well written, informative, amusing and I often agree with his conclusions. However in this case I don't; whilst the PM has quite evidently not been firing on all cylinders since his brush with COVID, I have confidence that he will rally, looking at what he's managed to do since becoming PM (stonking majority, Brexit enacted, and despite the relentless bad press, a pretty effective defence of the economy through lockdown).

I am a subscriber to the Spectator, and have been for some time. I find it an essential read which helps me peek beyond the political curtain, but I don't consider its articles to be irrefutable or writ on stone tablets. IMHO this is just the editorial pendulum swinging to one extreme. Over the coming months (dependent on events dear boy), "Boris is awful, and must go" articles in the Speccy will be replaced by "Boris has some redeeming qualities", and then culminate "The old Boris is back!" ,before tipping back toward "Grave weaknesses in Boris's leadership".

Plus ca change.
That last bit of your post is the telling one. I too believe that Boris will bounce back once Covid stops filling so much political time - he has the ability to adapt and adjust. Unlike his predecessor who was so timid that she could not move forward at all and had absolutely no ability to adapt and change. Thank goodness she had been eased out prior to the Covid outbreak!

The complaints about BoJo are not so much that he has made mistakes but he is taking actions that the Remainer media and other elements don't like! He has made mistakes over Covid, but this is a new phenomenon which nobody, regardless of their education or brain size, knew exactly how to deal with it. Mistakes and errors have been made, but importantly they have been identified and acted on. I am sure the wash-up will not be very critical of government actions, although that will be the aim of the BBC and Opposition.
 

doc80905

War Hero
But funnily enough not many on the opposition benches about Boris holding China to account for the original source... very convenient
Governments would rather go to war against their own people with draconian sanctions than say a peep about the real culprits. Not just here but around the world (Donald Trump a notable exception)
 
Governments would rather go to war against their own people with draconian sanctions than say a peep about the real culprits. Not just here but around the world (Donald Trump a notable exception

Excuse thread swerve.

China has a lot to answer for, has resisted any suggestion in a hugely aggressive manner, and Australia is presently paying a heavy economic penalty for having dared to do so.

Boris has taken steps, but has also acted diplomatically in this respect. As the economic rabid Gorilla in the room, China, regretfully has to be treated with extreme caution.



With regard to the EU only regarding the CJEU as the only arbiter, it a bit like the recent election of a Chinese Judge to the International Tribunal of the sea. A joke.
.

France, Germany and the United Kingdom recently made statements with regard to China’s claims of ‘historic rights’ over the South China Sea waters that they do not comply with international law and UNCLOS provisions and recall that the arbitral award in the Philippines V. China case dating to 12 July 2016 clearly confirms this point.

“France, Germany and the United Kingdom hold that all maritime claims in the South China Sea should be made and peacefully resolved in accordance with the principles and rules of UNCLOS and the means and procedures for the settlement of disputes provided for in the Convention.”

All three countries insist their position on the South China Sea is “without prejudice” and that they “take no position” on territorial disputes in the region.

With a Chinese judge now in place who knows what will happen.
 
Last edited:
Excuse thread swerve.

China has a lot to answer for, has resisted any suggestion in a hugely aggressive manner, and Australia is presently paying a heavy economic penalty for having dared to do so.

Boris has taken steps, but has also acted diplomatically in this respect. As the economic rabid Gorilla in the room, China, regretfully has to be treated with extreme caution.



With regard to the EU only regarding the CJEU as the only arbiter, it a bit like the recent election of a Chinese Judge to the International Tribunal of the sea. A joke.
.

France, Germany and the United Kingdom recently made statements with regard to China’s claims of ‘historic rights’ over the South China Sea waters that they do not comply with international law and UNCLOS provisions and recall that the arbitral award in the Philippines V. China case dating to 12 July 2016 clearly confirms this point.

“France, Germany and the United Kingdom hold that all maritime claims in the South China Sea should be made and peacefully resolved in accordance with the principles and rules of UNCLOS and the means and procedures for the settlement of disputes provided for in the Convention.”

All three countries insist their position on the South China Sea is “without prejudice” and that they “take no position” on territorial disputes in the region.

With a Chinese judge now in place who knows what will happen.

Autocracies such as China, Russia etc., do not respond in the slightest to diplomatic soft soaping and encouragement. We are no longer in a position to send in the gunboats, so the only possible leverage left is economic.

I don't know about the records of France and Germany in this respect, but the UK is only capable now of talking a good job. We still trade lavishly with the likes of China (predominantly one way traffic) and Saudi Arabia (arms and technology), while dirty Russian money fills the vaults of British banks.

Many old-established, formerly British businesses are now in the hands of Chinese concerns.

London is filled with properties owned by citizens and functionaries of Russia, China, Saudi Arabia and other politically undesirable Arab potentates.

Murder is committed on our streets by agents of the Russian state, apparently with very little consequence to them.

I cannot single out Boris Johnson as the only one who is quite prepared to sit on his hands. This situation has pertained for years, under a variety of administrations. However, I can see nothing at all in the man that suggests to me that he would be the one to break the mould.

We'll always talk a good job, but assorted world dictatorships are only too aware that they have nothing whatsoever to fear from us. They know that we a very small and diminishing power and, more crucially, that we have our price.
 
We still trade lavishly with the likes of China (predominantly one way traffic) and Saudi Arabia (arms and technology),

Many old-established, formerly British businesses are now in the hands of Chinese concerns.

London is filled with properties owned by citizens and functionaries of Russia, China, Saudi Arabia and other politically undesirable Arab potentates.

Isn't that Global World a marvelous thing :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
Has anyone seen any Covid Marshals out and about, doing their stuff yet?

Is it too soon, given the training they will need?
 

Latest Threads

Top