Paolo Sandro
LightNews LightNews
banner
paolosandro.bsky.social
Paolo Sandro
@paolosandro.bsky.social
5.9K followers 1.4K following 4.6K posts
Associate Professor of Public Law and Legal Theory @lawatleeds.bsky.social, author of 'The Making of Constitutional Democracy: From Creation to Application of Law' (Hart 2022), Open Access at
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4562656#
Posts Replies Media Videos
paolosandro.bsky.social
The pot calls the kettle black

You couldn't make this up, honestly
December 7, 2025 at 7:08 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
'evidence led'
screenshot by the substack page of this guy @commontruth, with 'evidence led' (without hyphen) highlighted
December 5, 2025 at 9:01 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
Train is delayed due to a problem currently under investigation
December 1, 2025 at 8:26 AM
paolosandro.bsky.social
In fact, those with status under the EUSS are the foreign national group most likely to be both in work and claiming UC (see fig 2). This suggests – and our research supports this – that many EU citizens are in low paid work in the UK and are using UC to top up their pay. The pandemic showed us that many of the industries where these EU nationals work are essential– for example care workers or those working on farms and in factories. If this group were unable to ‘top-up’ their low paid work with UC, it is unlikely they would be able to remain in these jobs long-term. These jobs are shunned by British workers, but they do ensure cheap food, albeit subsidised by the taxpayer.
November 20, 2025 at 2:47 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
'These repeated references to ‘maintaining compliance’ as opposed to ‘being compliant’, as well as avoiding legal scrutiny, run the risk of venturing into the world of Humpty Dumpty- enabling states to maintain that words (laws) mean just what they say they mean.'
One of the five tests presented and used in the Wolfson Report is the ‘sovereign borders test’. In respect of which the Report states at [16-17] that the UK could, free from the purported constraints of the ECHR, ‘adopt more robust policies in this area and still maintain compliance with other international instruments to which the UK is signatory, principally the Refugee Convention and the Convention Against Torture’ (emphasis added). The report cites Australia in support of this contention. Stevie Martin, Stephanie Palmer and I have written in our forthcoming editorial for the December 2025 issue of the European Human Rights Law Review that any suggestion that Australia’s immigration laws, policies and/or practices comply with international rights instruments including the Convention Against Torture is plainly incorrect. Consequently, it is troubling from a rule of law perspective to read statements such as the following, at [73], that: ‘where there is no body capable of providing a definitive conclusion on the interpretation of an instrument, the UK will be in a better position to argue that its actions and policies are compatible with the instrument in question, provided it has bona fide opinion as to the meaning of the instrument’. Particularly when observing that the Report immediately goes on to state that ‘[t]his in part explains how the Australian Government maintains that its border policy is compliant with international law: while it is signed up to the Refugee Convention, it is not a member of the ECHR. As a result, its position cannot be authoritatively second-guessed in any competent international court’ (emphasis added). These repeated references to ‘maintaining compliance’ as opposed to ‘being compliant’, as well as avoiding legal scrutiny, run the risk of venturing into the world of Humpty Dumpty- enabling states to maintain that words (laws) mean just what they say they mean. This was arguably the underlying ethos of the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum
November 19, 2025 at 10:31 AM
paolosandro.bsky.social
And the absolutely poignant conclusion:
Wherever we looked for the prominent flaggers and leaders of this movement, we found people smugglers and sex doll salesmen, people with dubious criminal pasts and people willing to put in a good word for Adolf Hitler. Farage told us the flag-raisers were just ordinary folk sticking it to the system. A few months’ worth of local journalism later, that now looks like a shaky claim.
November 1, 2025 at 10:13 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
Much like the supporters of Twamley in Salford, when we published Logan’s social media posts, the backlash was immediate, including a series of remarks from his supporters on a popular local Facebook page insinuating that The Bell team who broke the story are paedophiles.
November 1, 2025 at 10:09 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
Confronted with these posts, Logan initially went into denial mode: we had the wrong Kieran, he said. When a journalist from the Daily Record finally got Logan on the phone, he instead decided to try to put his Hitler approval in context. “Everybody is entitled to their own opinion. I understand that Hitler went nuts at the end,” Logan explained. “No wonder, the drugs do that to most people. But at the start he had good intentions. Maybe they slipped a bit but he had good intentions for his country.”
November 1, 2025 at 10:08 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
And yet, it is striking how many of the key players we have looked into — the people who have gone out of their way to put up hundreds of flags — seem anything but ordinary. In my experience, most people do not share overtly racist social media posts; they do not have criminal records for people smuggling or involvement in racist crimes. But time and again, our reporters — and others looking into this — have found key flag raisers with these kinds of CVs.
November 1, 2025 at 10:06 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
is this meme top: us law profs cosying up to Trump middle: murder bottom: is this legal?
October 25, 2025 at 9:07 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
Simpsons so far meme: top image: I've never felt so unwelcome in this country bottom image..you have never felt so unwelcome.. so far
October 21, 2025 at 10:30 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
I might have just created the best public law slide of my life
powerpoint slides depicting three decisions by UKSC discussing constitutional statutes with accompanying drake meme photos: next to HS2 and Privacy International, Drake approves, next to Re Allister, Drake says nooooooooooo
October 16, 2025 at 2:53 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
Photo of book criminal justice politics powers and human rights by Keir starmer and others Photo of book European human rights law by Keir starmer Photo of Blackstone's human rights digest, by Keir starmer
October 14, 2025 at 10:00 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
'On 30 May 1924, Matteotti openly spoke in the Italian Parliament, alleging the fascists committed electoral fraud in the 1924 general election, and denounced the violence they used to gain votes. Eleven days later, he was kidnapped and killed by the secret political police of Benito Mussolini.'
Picture of Giacomo Matteotti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giacomo_Matteotti
October 13, 2025 at 3:51 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
At last, Vermeule & co. have fully dropped the act
Lawful Proscription: Designation of Antifa as a Domestic Terror Organization What Trump’s Executive Order means and how the law must change for it to mean anything more. MANAGING EDITORS- NEW DIGEST OCT 07, 2025 The New Digest is delighted to publish this guest essay by J.T. Alexander. Mr. Alexander is an attorney in Alaska with a prior career in counterterrorism and counterintelligence.
October 12, 2025 at 11:08 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
screenshot of Valentin vacherot new ATP live ranking, n 40 in the world, up 164 position with one tournament
October 12, 2025 at 2:45 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
Finally, from the conclusion, whatever policy is chosen, 'it will need to be given crystal-clear expression' in a GE manifesto, including, for example, that 'it should specify that the UK Government would leave the ECHR and repeal the HRA irrespective of the stance of devolved administrations.' /end
Whatever policy is chosen, it will need to be given crystal-clear expression in any future general election manifesto, explaining what steps a future Government intends to take on the ECHR, and drafted in such a way as to 454 As does the EU, which has a comprehensive returns programme which operates through agreements with Russia, Belarus, Hong Kong, Pakistan and 77 African, Caribbean and Pacific countries who are not signatories to the ECHR: https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and- asylum/irregular-migration-and-return/effective-firm-and-fair-eu-return-and-readmission- policy_en. Page 177 of 185 PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL / SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE avoid any suggestion that it is a conditional intention (for example, it should specify that the UK Government would leave the ECHR and repeal the HRA irrespective of the stance of devolved administrations). That would be important not only for parliamentary handling, especially in the House of Lords, but also (and more importantly) so that we can be clear with the electorate as to what our policies are, and the manifesto on which Conservative Party candidates would stand.
October 6, 2025 at 3:21 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
state action. The result is the following passage, which is worth highlighting in full, with no comment. /7
Second, where there is no body capable of providing a definitive conclusion on the interpretation of an instrument, the UK will be in a better position to argue that its actions and policies are compatible with the instrument in question, provided it has bona fide opinion as to the meaning of the instrument (see Article 31). This, in part, explains how the Australian Government maintains that its border policy is compliant with international law: while it is signed up to the Refugee Convention, it is not a member of the ECHR. As a result, its position cannot be authoritatively second-guessed in any competent international court.107
October 6, 2025 at 3:21 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
Wolfson does not ('at this time') consider necessary to leave the Refugee Convention nor the Convention against Torture because neither of them establishes a supranational court with the power to offer a definitive interpretation of their provision, so individuals have no ability to challenge /6
Unlike the ECHR, neither the Refugee Convention nor the ECAT has a standing, authoritative interpretive court.106 The effect of this is twofold. First, the ability of an individual to challenge an action that they allege is in breach of one of those international instruments is limited, save where those instruments have been directly incorporated into domestic law. Second, where there is no body capable of providing a definitive conclusion on the interpretation of an instrument, the UK will be in a better position to argue that its actions and policies are compatible with the instrument in question, provided it has bona fide opinion as to the meaning of the instrument (see Article 31). This, in part, explains how the Australian Government maintains that its border policy is compliant with international law: while it is signed up to the Refugee Convention, it is not a member of the ECHR. As a result, its position cannot be authoritatively second-guessed in any competent international court.107 It is clear, then, that a stringent regime could be pursued outside of the ECHR, while remaining within the Refugee Convention. For completeness, therefore, while I consider it would be prudent to consider withdrawal from ECAT and, at least, significantly amend the Modern Slavery Act 2015, I do not consider it necessary at this time to leave the Refugee Convention to be able to achieve your policy goals on immigration (although it would be necessary to remove or limit the reference to those instruments in domestic UK legislation).
October 6, 2025 at 3:21 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
At [259-261], Lord Wolfson claims that 'References to the ECHR in the BGFA are references to the text of ECHR rights, rather than to the Convention as a treaty-based system of international adjudication'. This would be because the commitment on the part of the UK to complete the incorporation /3
259. 260. In addition, it would make no sense to read a duty on the British Government to incorporate the ECHR into the law applicable in Northern Ireland, with direct access to the courts, as entailing a further and quite different duty to remain a party to the ECHR. Or to put the point another way, the duty to incorporate the ECHR into the law applicable in Northern Ireland is not a duty to maintain the position in international law by virtue of which persons within Northern Ireland retain a right of individual petition to the ECtHR. Indeed, the right of individual petition to the Strasbourg Court already existed both in the UK and in the Republic of Ireland, and the BGFA says nothing about it except in so far as any modification to it – whether by reason of ECHR treaty change or British or Irish denunciation of the ECHR – would, of course, constitute a matter that it might be necessary to discuss in the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference. When the Agreement says “direct access to the courts”, this must in context mean the courts of Northern Ireland and the UK and cannot be understood, or have been intended to be understood, as meaning the ECtHR. 261. 262. It follows that the only commitment that the Multi-Party Agreement imposes on the British Government in relation to the ECHR is to incorporate the text of ECHR rights into the law applicable in Northern Ireland and thus to impose legally enforceable restrictions on the powers of the Assembly, Executive, and other public bodies, complete with remedies, including the power to nullify any legislative infringement of the rights. References to the ECHR in the BGFA are references to the text of ECHR rights, rather than to the Convention as a treaty-based system of international adjudication. It is hard otherwise to read the obligation to incorporate the ECHR into domestic law and to limit the competence of the Assembly.
October 6, 2025 at 3:21 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
He begins by pointing out that it's not a policy paper or a report, but a 'legal analysis' of the ECHR and HRA
'as measured against a series of tests'. First q.: why/how were those tests chosen? Second, does the selectiveness of those tests betray the policy nature of the document after all? /2
This document is neither a policy paper nor a report. It is a legal analysis of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”) and Human Rights Act 1998 (“HRA”) as measured against a series of tests, with a view to enabling you, as Leader, together with the Shadow Cabinet, to decide whether Conservative Party policy should be that the UK remain a signatory to, or should withdraw from, the ECHR.
October 6, 2025 at 3:21 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
If there are no hiccups, I really look forward to spending part of my sabbatical next year as a Barbara Huber Senior Scholar at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law in Freiburg, working with Ralf Poscher and other amazing colleagues in legal philosophy and public law.
Screenshot of webpage https://csl.mpg.de/en/barbara-huber-scholarship-holder
October 6, 2025 at 11:41 AM
paolosandro.bsky.social
October 4, 2025 at 7:41 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
This is what the teacher said, verbatim apparently. Can someone explain to me how the statement in the quote is even remotely contentious?
The comments made by the teacher at Broadoak School on Friday were captured on a video, shared among parents before being forwarded to the Manchester Evening News. In the clip, the member of staff can be heard noting the rise in the number of flags of St George erected on lampposts in Partington and other parts of the country before telling pupils: "We are not saying that the England flag is an inherently racist symbol. However, unfortunately for some people it has been viewed to be that." The teacher told the pupils she joined a counter protest in Fallowfield to oppose people there who were 'trying to make those people inside the hotel feel unwelcome'. She said some of the main protesters were 'using Nazi salutes and throwing very racist abuse towards the people inside'.
September 30, 2025 at 9:22 PM
paolosandro.bsky.social
In fact, it highlights the inherent danger in overstating the relevance of any theory of the separation of powers qua technique for the limitation (rather than organisation) of political power. As Constant had already warned in his Principles of Politics:[118] When political authority is not limited, the organization of government becomes a very secondary question. The mutual supervision of the diverse sections of the government is useful only in preventing one of them from aggrandizing itself at the expense of the others. But if the total sum of their powers is unbounded, if when they band together these government sections are permitted to invade everything, who is to stop them forming coalitions to engage in oppression at will? What matters to me is not that my personal rights shall not be violated by one such power-group, without the approval of another such, but that this violation be forbidden to all sections of government. It is not enough that the executive’s agents have to invoke the authorization of the legislature. Rather, it is that the legislature shall not authorize their actions except in a specified jurisdiction. It is not worth much that the executive power has no right to act without the assent of a law, if no limits are placed on this assent, if no one declares that there are things about which the legislature has no right to make laws, or, in other words, that there are areas of individual existence in relation to which society is not entitled to have any will.
September 22, 2025 at 7:53 PM