Foreign Judges vs British Veterans
Contrary to Lord Hermer’s desires, our courts should come first. The rule of law is too important to become a political football.
The Shadow Attorney General, Lord Wolfson, in a Policy Exchange keynote speech, made a crucial distinction: breaking British law is fundamentally different from choosing not to follow international court rulings.
He argues that while British officials must always obey our domestic laws, there are times when Britain can — and should — say no to foreign courts.
The problem? The current government's approach of "uncritical obedience to international law" proposed by the Attorney General, Lord Hermer, risks surrendering our ability to act in our national interest, including in sensitive cases like those involving Northern Ireland veterans.
What's really at stake here? Our veterans' right to be judged under clear British laws. Instead, they're facing:
Endless investigations decades after the events
Their cases being influenced by international courts
New standards being applied to historical actions
As Lord Wolfson emphasises, “the rule of law is too important to become a political football”. Yet that's exactly what's happening when we allow international obligations to override Parliament's decisions about how to handle the complex legacy of the Troubles.
This isn't about ignoring the law — it's about maintaining our constitutional principles. Lord Wolfson argues we “should take international law and international institutions seriously, but without surrendering to it or to them either our capacity or our duty to act in and for the national interest”.
What do you think?
Should British veterans be answerable to European courts for actions taken during the Troubles? Have your say in the comments below.
#NoJusticeforSoldiers #BritishJustice #Veterans #NorthernIreland