Ministers ‘believe' Palestine recognition is compliant with international law
Some 38 members of the House of Lords, including some of the UK's most eminent lawyers, have written to Attorney General Lord Hermer about the Prime Minister's announcement.
As first reported by the Times newspaper, the peers warned Sir Keir Starmer's pledge to recognise Palestine may breach international law as the territory may not meet the criteria for statehood under the Montevideo Convention, a treaty signed in 1933.
Asked whether recognising Palestine is compliant with international law, Mr Thomas told Times Radio: 'Yes, we believe it is.
'In the end, recognition of another state is a political judgment and over 140 countries have already recognised Palestine, and we're determined to do so in September if Israel does not end the violence in Gaza, agree to a ceasefire and agree to a lasting route towards a two-state solution, and to no annexation in the West Bank.'
In their letter to Lord Hermer, the peers said Palestine 'does not meet the international law criteria for recognition of a state, namely, defined territory, a permanent population, an effective government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states'.
There is no certainty over the borders of Palestine, they said, and no single government as Hamas and Fatah are enemies.
Mr Thomas told Times Radio there is a 'clear population' in Palestine and 'we have made clear that we think you would recognise the state of Palestine, and that state of Palestine would be based on the 1967 borders'.
In their letter, seen by the PA news agency, the peers added: 'You have said that a selective, 'pick and mix' approach to international law will lead to its disintegration, and that the criteria set out in international law should not be manipulated for reasons of political expedience.
'Accordingly, we expect you to demonstrate this commitment by explaining to the public and to the Government that recognition of Palestine would be contrary to the principles governing recognition of states in international law.'
Lord Hermer has previously insisted a commitment to international law 'goes absolutely to the heart' of the Government's approach to foreign policy.
Among the respected lawyers to have signed the letter are Lord Pannick – who represented the previous government at the Supreme Court over its Rwanda scheme – as well as KCs Lord Verdirame and Lord Faulks.
Sir Keir announced earlier this week that the UK could take the step of recognising Palestine in September ahead of a gathering at the UN.
The UK will only refrain from doing so if Israel allows more aid into Gaza, stops annexing land in the West Bank, agrees to a ceasefire, and signs up to a long-term peace process over the next two month, the PM said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rhyl Journal
2 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
Government defends Online Safety Act after X claims it threatens free speech
In a post titled What Happens When Oversight Becomes Overreach, the platform, formerly known as Twitter, outlined criticism of the act and the 'heavy-handed' UK regulators. The Government countered that it is 'demonstrably false' that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech and said it is not designed to censor political debate. Under rules that came into effect on July 25, online platforms must take steps to prevent children accessing harmful content such as pornography or material that encourages suicide. This includes a new duty for online providers to reduce the risk that users encounter illegal content as well as age verification measures in the UK to access pornographic content. 'As a result, the act's laudable intentions are at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach. Without a more balanced, collaborative approach, free speech will suffer,' X said. It accused regulators of taking a 'heavy-handed approach' and said that 'many are now concerned that a plan ostensibly intended to keep children safe is at risk of seriously infringing on the public's right to free expression'. Ofcom said this week it had launched investigations into 34 pornography sites for new age-check requirements. The company said 'a balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children'. A Government spokesperson said: 'It is demonstrably false that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech. 'As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression. Failure to meet either obligation can lead to severe penalties, including fines of up to 10% of global revenue or £18 million, whichever is greater. 'The Act is not designed to censor political debate and does not require platforms to age gate any content other than those which present the most serious risks to children such as pornography or suicide and self-harm content. 'Platforms have had several months to prepare for this law. It is a disservice to their users to hide behind deadlines as an excuse for failing to properly implement it.' Technology Secretary Peter Kyle became embroiled in a row with Nigel Farage earlier this week over Reform UK's pledge that it would scrap the Act if the party came into power. He said the Reform UK leader of being on the side of 'extreme pornographers'.
The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Good news on the fight to tackle scourge of council tax debt
Firstly, following years of campaigning by Citizens Advice Scotland, the Scottish Government is funding a national project, which we are leading. Local CABs are working hand in hand with their councils to develop policies and practices that will reduce the impact of council tax debt on people who are financially struggling, while helping council tax collection rates. This project is still in its early stages but already we're seeing some fantastic examples of collaborative working, for example to increase awareness of council tax discounts and to focus on ways of identifying people who need support before they explicitly ask for it. Secondly, the governments in the UK and Wales are consulting on reforming council tax collection processes. Positive proposals include more time to pay, more time for advice and support, provision of alternative payment arrangements, and avoiding excessive enforcement action. We have written, with the support of others, to the Scottish Government to urge them to join with the other nations of the UK to conduct a similar consultation and drive forward this kind of change. Allowing people more time to pay their arrears is perhaps the most important reform we would like to see. The debt recovery process is too quick and needs slowing, and a pause in the process is key to helping those who are struggling. This would allow people time to seek advice from agencies such as their local CAB to get budgeting help and income maximisation support so they're in a better position to meet some, if not all, of the arrears. This would benefit the council too, as it will get council tax income it may not otherwise have received while reducing the costs of recovering the arrears. As I say, it is hugely promising to see to see momentum and movement in the right direction on this issue. And it's real proof that our type of rational, compassionate evidenced-based advocacy can get results that will make a real difference to peoples' lives. There is growing support across civic Scotland for a fairer system of council tax collection, one which puts a clearer emphasis on helping those in arrears but who are willing to pay, while balancing the needs of councils to collect their income. With the Holyrood election less than a year away, we – along with other charities – will be aiming to make sure that tackling council tax debt, and public sector debt more widely, is on the agenda of party manifestos and campaigns. Watch this space. Myles Fitt is head of the Financial Health team at Citizens Advice Scotland
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Record number of over-60s are referred to anti-terrorism scheme amid overall explosion in 'extreme right wing' views
Record numbers of over-60s are being referred to the Government's troubled anti-terrorism scheme, the Daily Mail can reveal today. Home Office figures show 127 adults in their 60s or beyond were put on Prevent's radar in 2023/24 - the most since records began in 2016. Of them, 43 had sparked alarm for expressing 'extreme right wing' views. Extreme right wing ideologies 'can be broadly characterised as cultural nationalism, white nationalism and white supremacism', officials say. Guidance published online states they also use violence to further their aims. Yet free speech campaigners fear that anyone critical of mass immigration might be being wrongly labelled an 'extremist'. Last month, it was revealed how Prevent training documents listed sharing the view that Western culture was 'under threat from mass migration and a lack of integration' was a 'terrorist ideology'. And in 2023, it emerged that popular British sitcoms, including comedies Yes Minister and The Thick Of It, were marked as 'key texts' for white nationalists. Even the 1955 epic war film The Dam Busters and The Complete Works Of William Shakespeare were flagged as possible red flags of extremism by Prevent's Research Information and Communications Unit. Across all age groups, more than 1,300 people were referred to Prevent last year for 'extreme right wing' behaviour, including 27 kids under the age of ten. While 'extreme right wing' referrals have been stable since records began in 2016, the reports for over 60s in all categories has more than doubled - rising from 59 in 2016, to 127 in 2023. Over the same period, the overall number of referrals under the Islamist umbrella has plunged by 75 per cent, from 3,706 to 913 - or 13 per cent of the total. Islamist terrorism relates to 'the threat or use of violence as a means to establish a strict interpretation of an Islamic society'. A damning public report warned in 2023 that Prevent had been experiencing a 'loss of focus' as it had become distracted by far right cases, rather than concentrating on Islamists. In his long-awaited 188-page report, William Shawcross claimed too many resources were being focused on right-wing terrorism rather than its Islamist equivalent, which has been responsible for far more deadly attacks. Since 2015, the law has placed public bodies, such as schools and the police, under a legal duty to identify people in danger of turning to extremism. But the £49million-a-year Prevent scheme has faced huge criticism over its failures in spotting Islamist terror sympathisers, including those with links to notorious hate preacher Anjem Choudary. Southport murderer Axel Rudakubana was also missed, despite being referred to the deradicalisation body three times before he went on to knife three children to death in July 2024. The scheme works by local council-appointed Prevent coordinators taking referrals from public servants like teachers and social workers, with each individual of concern categorised by their ideology. Less serious cases are dealt with by councils, who can offer services like mentoring or parenting support, while the more serious ones go to Channel, where a panel of local officials, including police, will recommend the next steps. If Prevent officers find no risk of radicalisation while conducting initial checks, the case is immediately closed. Potential threats from left wing organisations are also included in the annual Prevent figures, although an exact toll is not provided as counter-terror chiefs view the risk as slim. Expressing sympathy or admiration for the likes of Adolf Hitler or praising extremists would be enough to risk being flagged to Prevent if overheard by a teacher, social worker or even work colleague. However concerns have been raised after Prevent has also been flagging far more mainstream views. Pictures from a Prevent online training course emerged last month which highlighted 'dangerous' beliefs such as 'Cultural nationalism' and the idea 'Western culture is under threat'. Critics warned the definition of 'cultural nationalism' is too broad and could even encompass the likes of Sir Keir Starmer's 'island of strangers' speech - despite polling showing most Brits agreed with him. There are three categories of 'Extreme right-wing' terrorism according to Prevent. They are 'Cultural nationalism', 'white/ethno-nationalism' and 'white supremacism' What is Prevent? Prevent was set up in 2006 to combat the threat of Islamic terrorism in the UK following the 7/7 London bombings which killed 52 commuters. The stated aim of the voluntary programme is to 'divert' people from potential terrorism-related activity before they offend, and it is not a criminal sanction. Since 2015, local authority staff and other professionals such as doctors, teachers and social workers have a duty to flag concerns about an individual being radicalised or drawn into a terrorism. Less serious reports may be sent to council services, which could include parenting support for families whose children have been watching inappropriate videos online. Serious reports are forwarded on to Prevent's Channel stage, at which a panel of local police, healthcare specialists and social workers meeting monthly will consider the case. Hundreds of Prevent officers also work inside police forces and local authorities to identify potential extremists, and intervene with a programme of deradicalisation. Over the years, Prevent has been reformed several times. Each year, thousands staff undergo Prevent training. Prevent faced a barrage of criticism last year when a 12-year-old schoolboy was investigated by counter-extremism officers after he declared there 'are only two genders'. The child made a video, posted online, in which he also stated: 'There's no such thing as non-binary'. But the school told the boy's mother they would refer him to Prevent amid fears he could be at risk of being radicalised by the far-right. The boy's mother was visited by Prevent and Northumbria Police officers, in a meeting she described as 'an interrogation'. Other teenage boys face investigation by anti-terrorism officers if they make sexist remarks in the classroom, it was claimed. One source said previously comments about a 'woman's place being in the kitchen' could be enough to spark a referral to the unit. The personal details of those referred to Prevent are retained on its databases for at least six years and duplicated across police and intelligence systems. It comes as counter terrorism officers urged parents to keep an eye out for signs that their child could be drawn into extremism after Netflix's Adolescence became a topic of mainstream political debate. In April, the Met Police's Prevent co-coordinator told parents to 'take an active interest' in their child's online activities so they can be aware of signs that they could be vulnerable to radicalisation. Adolescence examines so-called incel (involuntary celibate) culture, which is related to violence and hating women. However, the latest data shows incels make up less than one per cent of Prevent referrals. Prevent is the first tier in the Government's anti radicalisation strategy. After an initial discussion with police, a case can be diverted to Channel process - a voluntary programme designed to support people deemed terrorist threats. People who accept help from Channel can get assistance through mentoring, religious guidance, education and even help with housing and hobbies in a bid to lead them away from trouble. If people at risk of radicalisation refuse help or are at continued risk of radicalisation, they will be continually monitored by police. In the past, Prevent has been criticised by groups who claim it discriminates against Muslims and children. Others have claimed it lacks transparency, as people are often unaware why they have been referred or how they can challenge it. However a study by the Counter Extremism Group, a think tank close to the government, previously found many of the attacks on the programme were misguided and relied largely on 'speculation and unproven assumptions' by 'anti-Prevent activists'. A Home Office spokesperson said: 'Since it first came into existence two decades ago, the Prevent programme has dealt with a wide range of individuals where concerns have been raised about their potential radicalisation. 'The make-up of the individuals referred to Prevent may change over time, but the role of the programme in stopping people from becoming terrorists remains the same.' The number of referrals might include individuals who have been reported more than once during the year.
