So far as I can see, there is little appetite for 'free movement of people'.
European Courts of Human Rights, were responsible for taking so long to get Abu Hamza out of the UK..
"In past cases, the ECtHR has prevented the UK from deporting suspected foreign terrorists to places where they might be tortured. In Hamza's case, this has been extended to refusing extradition to a country where he might be jailed for life, and where the prison regime is judged too harsh "
Abu Qatada was another the ECHR supported.
It's bonkers, and we don't need a bunch of wonkers telling UK for evermore that we cannot deport foreign nationals who are guilty of crimes against the British Nationals or the security of this country, particularly in view of the present day environment ,and it would seem likely to continue long into the future. We can have our very own Court of Human Rights on which the ECHR was based .
So what will come about , is every Foreign National we might wish to expel will be running to the ECHR, we will have to foot the bill, there will be no resolve in such cases for a very long time, and our courts will eventually be amalgamated into a very much more complex system than what it is now, which will be the demise of any country having an independent voice.
" The Convention was designed to incorporate a traditional civil liberties approach to securing "effective political democracy", from the strongest traditions in the United Kingdom, France and other member states of the fledgling Council of Europe, as said by Guido Raimondi, President of European Court of Human Rights:"
The Convention was drafted by the Council of Europe.
Considering there are 47 states answerable to this , I can't see that all things are equal. How do Honour Killings and Arranged Marriages come into play on Muslim countries such as Turkey . How does Russia's refusal to allow someone stand for election, stand on the Human Rights platform, and particularly when the Convention is responsible for Democracy and freedom of speech. Ha ! there are quite a number of areas where the latter two points don't quite get recognised in many countries out of the 47.
Just as a matter of interest, what exactly is 'freedom of speech' in democratic countries these days ? Have the rules been changed without us knowing by the ECHR, because a number of other things have and as I understand it, freedom of speech used to mean you could say what you wanted. We still can towards The Queen, Prince Philip. Prince Charles, politicians, pop artists, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims (ATM), doctors ,nurses, teachers, everybody but not about those who live in or are connected to Israel. So Muslims cannot say anything about Israel but Israel can say what they like about Palestinians etc. Israel is classed as being in Europe, just like Turkey is. Double standards all around.
Discrimination ? Who is discriminated against in this day and age ? Not the foreign nationals. Freedom of movement will just be a vast number of people from all different generic differences, from all over the world, once they are given permission to stay and be given citizenship within the EU. That then means that every bugger from anywhere will be able to arrive and stay. Threatening our own identity, and of course Eu want freedom of movement to include us, because we are one of the wealthiest countries and they need us to take half of the migrants as the other half of the EU states haven't got enough to keep them going, and they don't want to be invaded by Nationals from other countries . They've had their wars, eg Bosnia , Croatia , Serbia and they don't want it again. So we will get the residue from just about anywhere dumped on us to relieve the pressure else where. Romania is a Muslim country, Bulgaria is a Muslim country, Albania is a Muslim country, so it goes on. No we don't want them all here.
No freedom of movement or we will regret the day, eventually.
British citizens 2.5 children, Islam 6.7 plus, children !
Those who don't have a religion or don't believe in it, make sure you understand that a certain religion will NOT allow there own to lapse. So there is no way the world will be ridding itself anywhere of religion, but Islam will systematically become the most prominent, the law of averages degrees it.
Very confusing :..........
Article 14 – discrimination
Article 14 contains a prohibition of discrimination. This prohibition is broad in some ways and narrow in others. It is broad in that it prohibits discrimination under a potentially unlimited number of grounds. While the article specifically prohibits discrimination based on "sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinions, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status", the last of these allows the court to extend to Article 14 protection to other grounds not specifically mentioned such as has been done regarding discrimination based on a person's sexual orientation.
At the same time, the article's protection is limited in that it only prohibits discrimination with respect to rights under the Convention. Thus, an applicant must prove discrimination in the enjoyment of a specific right that is guaranteed elsewhere in the Convention (e.g. discrimination based on sex – Article 14 – in the enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression – Article 10). It has been said that laws regarding familial sexual relationships (or incest) are in breach of Article 14 when combined with Article 8.
Protocol 12 extends this prohibition to cover discrimination in any legal right, even when that legal right is not protected under the Convention, so long as it is provided for in national law.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights