SUELLA Braverman has been compared to global dictators like Russia's Vladimir Putin by a senior member of her own party.
The intense criticism of the former home secretary, from another former cabinet secretary, came after she suggested drafting a bill to deport people to Rwanda which specifically excluded “all avenues of legal challenge”.
Writing an article in the Telegraph after she was fired in disgrace, Braverman argued that there were five tests to meet for any “emergency legislation” to circumvent the Supreme Court’s ruling that deporting people to Rwanda is unlawful.
The second of these five tests was that: “The entirety of the Human Rights Act and European Convention on Human Rights, and other relevant international obligations, or legislation, including the Refugee Convention, must be disapplied.”
READ MORE: Ruth Wishart: Suella Braverman and Tories have sullied Home Office
She added: “Judicial review, all common law challenges, and all injunctive relief, including the suspensive challenges available under the Illegal Migration Act must be expressly excluded.”
The calls were likened to something foreign dictators would do by Damian Green, a former work and pensions secretary.
The senior Tory MP wrote: “The second test is the most unconservative statement I have ever heard from a Conservative politician.
“Giving the state the explicit power to override every legal constraint is what Putin and [China’s Xi Jinping] do. We absolutely cannot go there.”
The second test is the most unconservative statement I have ever heard from a Conservative politician. Giving the state the explicit power to override every legal constraint is what Putin and Xi do. We absolutely cannot go there. https://t.co/vYv6PiJRWb
— Damian Green MP (@DamianGreen) November 16, 2023
Another Tory MP, Simon Clarke, backed Braverman.
A close ally of Liz Truss during her brief time in government, Clarke wrote: “Suella sets out clear and rigorous tests for new legislation on small boats. “We should be crystal clear: half measures won’t work. We need the legislation that is brought forward to be truly effective, and if the Lords block it – let’s take it to the country.”
Braverman’s five tests were:
- 1: The bill must address the Supreme Court’s concerns regarding Rwanda.
- 2: The bill must enable flights before the next General Election.
- 3: Swift removal must mean swift removal.
- 4: Those arriving here illegally must be detained.
- 5: This must be treated as an emergency.
Braverman – who was home secretary last week – also claimed in her Telegraph article that the “fault” for the current situation “lies with the politicians who have failed to introduce legislation that would guarantee delivery of our Rwanda partnership”.
But she added: “Now is not the time to waste energy on a post-mortem of how we got here.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel