47
European human rights court questions UK decision to strip Shamima Begum of citizenship
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2025
47 points (100.0% liked)
UK Politics
4573 readers
123 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Send me a copy so I can read it since it is not unwritten.
Complete nonsense. This is not what a constitution is.
Constitution is a set law with the mechanics to amend it which needs higher threshold than an ordinary law, thus protecting the fundamental principles from a potential radical irresponsible parliaments.
UK does NOT have a constitution, it merely have constitutional conventions. If you don't believe me, belive Lord Nuremberg, the President of UK supreme Court:
When a country has a constitution, parliament of the day cannot change the law at will. It must change the constitution first or to ensure any changes are in line with existing constitution.
Scotland is a prime example. UK Parliament may decide tomorrow to remove any existing Scottish autonomy and to dissolve Scotland's Parliament. That wouldn't be the case if Scotland's autonomy was protected by the constitution.
The same goes for human rights BTW. Fascists of all kinds want to remove UK from ECHR because this is the only thing which can override the will of Parliament of the day. That wouldn't be the case if human rights were protected by the constitution.
UK does not have any constitution. It has conventions which, unlike any civilised country do not even ensure proper separation of powers.
You can either have a sovereign parliament, ie parliament which can decide literally anything ("let's remove rights we don't like!") or you can have a constitution - but you cannot have both as the constitution is above a parliament.
That's true if you only interpret constitution as "codified constitution", certainly.
But the point is still true if you replace "constitutional restrictions on doing so" with "constitutional conventions against doing so" or even simply "a history of protecting citizens against it", so I'm not sure what you're ultimately trying to argue here.
The context you took issue with was:
Read again and have a think. Without deluding yourself, ideally.
👍