Are the EU monitors blind or being hoodwinked by the UK?
In relation to the politics and government of the European Union, especially in relation to the Copenhagen criteria, using the Prisoners Votes Case as an example, it appears to me that the UK is falling short on the obligations and intent of the EU, which calls into question our legitimacy to be a member state within the EU.
"Membership requires that candidate country has achieved stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and, protection of minorities, the existence of a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union. Membership presupposes the candidate's ability to take on the obligations of membership including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union".
"When agreed in 1993, there was no mechanism for ensuring that any country which was already an EU member state was in compliance with these criteria". It is claimed that the subsequent monitoring arrangements now police compliance. However, either the monitors are blind or they are being hoodwinked by the UK.
The Prisoners Votes Case is evidence that the UK fails to meet these criteria "democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and, protection of minorities".
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
There is a mechanism in place but unfortunately it is clockwork, and no fecker in this country has wound it up yet.
ReplyDelete