The following research by Torquil Dick-Erikson has been sent to the the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament (ISC). 

Here are some facts that we believe need to be brought to the attention of the ISC:

How many in government, at any level, are aware that the European Court of Human Rights declared that up to 5 years in prison awaiting, not just trial, but a prisoner's first appearance in a public hearing in open court, is perfectly legitimate, and a "reasonable time" under the Convention's article 6, because it believes that this preventive "detention ... is intended to facilitate the preliminary investigation"? This judgement, rejecting an application from an Italian against Italy, dates from the mid-eighties, but is now necessarily a part of that Court's jurisprudence, ie its settled doctrine, so is relevant today, and shows clearly that the Court and the Convention have no place for Habeas Corpus. See details in the second half of this article. 

The following is a guest post by Torquil Dick-Erikson, a journalist specialising comparative criminal procedure

From the Daily Express, published on 18th July 2020:

"David Frost is understood to be eyeing his first breakthrough in the future relationship negotiations after holding talks with his EU counterpart Michel Barnier in Brussels. The pair agreed to put added emphasis on Britain’s future security pact with the EU as a potential landing zone for an agreement emerged. The two sides will hold four separate sessions on “law enforcement and judicial cooperation” as the Capital hosts its first ever round of negotiations with Brussels." [emphasis added]

The following letter by Christopher Gill, a former chairman of The Freedom Association, was published in the Sunday Telegraph last weekend.

"SIR – James Crisp’s report about possible compromises in the Brexit negotiations regarding the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is alarming.

"If the Boris Johnson administration thinks there can be any compromise on matters directly affecting individual liberty, it betrays the very principles it purports to uphold.