This does not say that at all - it says the opposite... it's all words and smokescreen... "...including with the aim of avoiding a hard border, while respecting the integrity of the Union legal order."
I hope you were not offering that as helpful to your cause as it would be a shoot, moment foot 11. The Union has consistently supported the goal of peace and reconciliation enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement in all its parts, and continuing to support and protect the achievements, benefits and commitments of the Peace Process will remain of paramount importance. in eu language this translated means, we will take note unless it is something we do not want In view of the unique circumstances on the island of Ireland, flexible and imaginative solutions will be required, including with the aim of avoiding a hard border, while respecting the integrity of the Union legal order. Unless they do it our way, no flexible or imaginative suggestions will be allowed, and they can go feck themselves with the GFA In this context, the Union should also recognise existing bilateral agreements and arrangements between the United Kingdom and Ireland which are compatible with EU law. Whilst the good friday agreement should be the de facto standard we are all trying to achieve, we will only agree to bits which come under eu law, which we control, so we win 25. Until it leaves the Union, the United Kingdom remains a full Member of the European Union, subject to all rights and obligations set out in the Treaties and under EU law, including the principle of sincere cooperation. We know we were never part of the GFA nor do we have any agreement with the U.K. on the GFA but we are going to use the GFA to our advantage. Lets hope the remainers never ask to see our copy of the gfa, because we don't have one because we never signed or agreed anything with the U.K. on this matter
According to Noobie? Insist on a hard border? Defacto Laws? Bartering chip. To get to his definition he has to “interpret from EU speak”.
Actually I've asked you 3 times so far, could you show a single copy of the good friday agreement that has the eu's signature on it and each time, you have simply ignored it or been unable to provide it. They were never signatories of the GFA and therefore they are using an agreement they had no official capacity in drawing up, concluding or signing off, as an official document for their own means Happy for the 4th time of asking, please show me where the eu signed off on the GFA? Until you do that, you are simply talking bolloxs sir
If any part of the Good Friday agreement breached EU law then in the 30 years that it has existed the British and Irish governments would have been put to the European Courts whether the ECJ or the ECtHR and the agreement be struck out. Neither the UK or any of its devolved parts can deviate from EU law. In answer to a question, the GFA is compatible with EU law.
Should the Northern Irish assembly or Scottish executive legislate in contradiction of EU law that legislation is immediately deemed null and void. The Good Friday agreement rather than deviate from EU law fully embodies it.
It doesn’t need to sign it off. The human rights act embodies the principles of the ECHR. The Council of Europe and the European union different bodies.
When dealing with the eu, signed legal documents are all that matters please show the legal document the eu signed in regards to the GFA, can you? You can't. Therefore, they are trying to use a legal agreement between two other parties, that the eu were not legally involved with, as a legal document to assist eu trade negotiations. Their claim of being the legal enforcer and arbitor of the gfa is a false one as no legal document exists to support that claim. So 5th time, where is the eu's signature on the gfa?
Human Rights Act. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/contents The UK and ROI are signatories to the ECHR. They voluntarily continue to be signatories to the ECHR. Should they act contrary to the ECHR then either by individual petition (through the domestic courts first) or interstate litigation, each state can be forced by the ECtHR to comply with the ECHR. The UK, RofI and the power sharing parties are signatories to the GFA. That Good Friday Agreement is enforceable via the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. If any signatory to the GFA should breach its terms then the remaining signatories can take that dispute to the International Court of Justice for an answer. Because the parties are bound in this way, none of them can lawfully disregard any obligation under the GFA or the ECHR. It therefore does not matter a jot what influence the EU has over the parties’ agreements jointly under the GFA or seperately to the ECHR since the contracting parties can never break those agreements in any event. The EU has no influence whatsoever over Good Friday Agreement nor the ECHR. However since both of those treaties promote human rights it is only proper that the EU would see that those human rights of the citizens of those constracting parties are upheld.
Honestly don't worry despite asking several times now, you haven't been able to show why a legal agreement signed between two countries, is being hijacked by a third party political project to use as a trade agreement. As to your books, you'd think with that much information you would know the difference between a legal agreement between two countries, and a third party political project using trade agreements. Seems pointless for you to keep trying to hide you have no answer and hide it with jibber jabber, no more replies for you sir.
This isn’t my position. It’s yours. It’s you that thinks the GFA is being hijacked. My thoughts are that it doesn’t change a jot. The UK’s international commitments existed long before the Referendum vote. So, Affirmati Non Neganti Incumbit Probatio. Evidence the hijacking, please. Let know if you need anything called up.
Right, I have a skype call to make but before that I'll leave you with this and it only requires a yes or no answer. Any attempt to divert will be seen for what it is In regards to the good friday agreement, if it was called into dispute and the judge presiding said, I wish to see the legal signatories to this agreement and the legal signatories only in my chambers, would the eu be in the room? Remember, just yes or no Remember now, no jibber jabber or waffle, I know the answer is no as do you, but it's still interesting to see what a man who thought half a dozen half read books was an impressive mike drop, when it wasn't, thinks.
According to my copy of Delusional Good Friday Agreement EJC / ECtHR Courtroom Drama Scenarios: Parties to the peace treaty, for our purposes here are UK, RofI and the parties that make up the NI Assembly, & the two Irish / UK Councils. ( I do not know what they are). I’ve stated this several times. The legislation I’ve hyperlinked previously will give that answer.
