Well the answer is that none of them seem to like the European convention on Human rights. The brain child of a certain Winston Churchill (who if we believe UKIP must have been some fluffy lefty who obviously hated Britain), this convention protects people from such things as torture or cruel and unusual punishment…which is probably why UKIP dont want it as the thought of any of em in Parliament has to count! 😳
Jokes aside though this is a bonkers policy that is so silly it has the rest of the EU baffled. Obviously enough it would mean the UK being chucked out of the EU. It would also mean Britain being relegated to a rogues gallery of nations that includes the likes of Kazakhstan and Belarus. This would of course have a wide host of legal implications, notably for example making it impossible for the UK to arrange the extradition of suspects…so all any criminal needs to do is make a break for the border and hes home free!
Consider for example Abu Qatada, recently cleared of charges in Jordan. Well if the UK decided to try and get him back here for trial, we could well face the absurdity of the UKs lack of commitment to human rights being used by his lawyers as reasons against his extradition back to Britain! This after the big legal battle to get him out of the UK while protecting his human rights.
To say this would be embarrassing and damaging to the UK is to put it mildly. Somewhere in Russia I suspect Putin is pissing himself with laughter at the field day hes going to have if Cameron has his way. It could not just cost the UK a place in the EU, but numerous other bodies, such as the UNHCR as well as effected Britains continued membership of the UN.
And its worth reflecting on the fact that the main opposition to Qatada, wasnt the European courts, but those right here in the UK. The problem is that the UK lacks a constitution, a rare thing for any country in the 21st century. The UKs arcane justice systems also places too much emphasis on the ability of judges to essentially make things up as they go along, but still be bound by decisions made previously by other judges. By contrast in most EU states, the constitution effectively takes precedence (up to a point of course!). All Cameron will succeed in doing is relocate the problem from Strasbourg to the UK.
The solution to the UKs woes here is simply to bring in a UK constitution, something Ive been saying for a while, but which was recently echoed by none other than the head of the UK supreme court. And incidentally a constitution would also protect the UK from any fears of an EU super state, as any further EU integration would require a constitutional change and thus a referendum in the UK to approve it.