Podcasts about european convention on human rights

The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill seeks to circumvent the UK Supreme Court's recent judgment holding the Government's Rwanda policy, concerning the removal of certain asylum-seekers, to Rwanda. The Bill contemplates placing the UK in breach of its international obligations, including under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Refugee Convention, while forming part of a policy that relies upon Rwanda's adherence to its own international obligations. The Bill is thus at once hypocritical and parochial, given that domestic legislation cannot free the UK of its legal obligations on the international plane. In this short video Professor Mark Elliott explores the legal and constitutional implications of the Bill. Mark Elliott is Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of St Catharine's College, Cambridge. From 2015 to 2019, he served as Legal Adviser to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, providing advice to the Committee on a range of legislative and other matters. Mark co-founded the international biennial Public Law Conference series and co-convened the first two conferences. He is the recipient of a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in teaching and is the author of a widely read blog http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ that is aimed at public law scholars, current and prospective law students, policy-makers, and others who are interested in the subject. For more information about Professor Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at: https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill seeks to circumvent the UK Supreme Court's recent judgment holding the Government's Rwanda policy, concerning the removal of certain asylum-seekers, to Rwanda. The Bill contemplates placing the UK in breach of its international obligations, including under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Refugee Convention, while forming part of a policy that relies upon Rwanda's adherence to its own international obligations. The Bill is thus at once hypocritical and parochial, given that domestic legislation cannot free the UK of its legal obligations on the international plane. In this short video Professor Mark Elliott explores the legal and constitutional implications of the Bill. Mark Elliott is Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of St Catharine's College, Cambridge. From 2015 to 2019, he served as Legal Adviser to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, providing advice to the Committee on a range of legislative and other matters. Mark co-founded the international biennial Public Law Conference series and co-convened the first two conferences. He is the recipient of a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in teaching and is the author of a widely read blog http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ that is aimed at public law scholars, current and prospective law students, policy-makers, and others who are interested in the subject. For more information about Professor Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at: https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill seeks to circumvent the UK Supreme Court's recent judgment holding the Government's Rwanda policy, concerning the removal of certain asylum-seekers, to Rwanda. The Bill contemplates placing the UK in breach of its international obligations, including under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Refugee Convention, while forming part of a policy that relies upon Rwanda's adherence to its own international obligations. The Bill is thus at once hypocritical and parochial, given that domestic legislation cannot free the UK of its legal obligations on the international plane. In this short video Professor Mark Elliott explores the legal and constitutional implications of the Bill. Mark Elliott is Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of St Catharine's College, Cambridge. From 2015 to 2019, he served as Legal Adviser to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, providing advice to the Committee on a range of legislative and other matters. Mark co-founded the international biennial Public Law Conference series and co-convened the first two conferences. He is the recipient of a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in teaching and is the author of a widely read blog http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ that is aimed at public law scholars, current and prospective law students, policy-makers, and others who are interested in the subject. For more information about Professor Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at: https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill seeks to circumvent the UK Supreme Court's recent judgment holding the Government's Rwanda policy, concerning the removal of certain asylum-seekers, to Rwanda. The Bill contemplates placing the UK in breach of its international obligations, including under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Refugee Convention, while forming part of a policy that relies upon Rwanda's adherence to its own international obligations. The Bill is thus at once hypocritical and parochial, given that domestic legislation cannot free the UK of its legal obligations on the international plane. In this short video Professor Mark Elliott explores the legal and constitutional implications of the Bill. Mark Elliott is Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of St Catharine's College, Cambridge. From 2015 to 2019, he served as Legal Adviser to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, providing advice to the Committee on a range of legislative and other matters. Mark co-founded the international biennial Public Law Conference series and co-convened the first two conferences. He is the recipient of a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in teaching and is the author of a widely read blog http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ that is aimed at public law scholars, current and prospective law students, policy-makers, and others who are interested in the subject. For more information about Professor Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at: https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill seeks to circumvent the UK Supreme Court's recent judgment holding the Government's Rwanda policy, concerning the removal of certain asylum-seekers, to Rwanda. The Bill contemplates placing the UK in breach of its international obligations, including under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Refugee Convention, while forming part of a policy that relies upon Rwanda's adherence to its own international obligations. The Bill is thus at once hypocritical and parochial, given that domestic legislation cannot free the UK of its legal obligations on the international plane. In this short video Professor Mark Elliott explores the legal and constitutional implications of the Bill. Mark Elliott is Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of St Catharine's College, Cambridge. From 2015 to 2019, he served as Legal Adviser to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, providing advice to the Committee on a range of legislative and other matters. Mark co-founded the international biennial Public Law Conference series and co-convened the first two conferences. He is the recipient of a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in teaching and is the author of a widely read blog http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ that is aimed at public law scholars, current and prospective law students, policy-makers, and others who are interested in the subject. For more information about Professor Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at: https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill seeks to circumvent the UK Supreme Court's recent judgment holding the Government's Rwanda policy, concerning the removal of certain asylum-seekers, to Rwanda. The Bill contemplates placing the UK in breach of its international obligations, including under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Refugee Convention, while forming part of a policy that relies upon Rwanda's adherence to its own international obligations. The Bill is thus at once hypocritical and parochial, given that domestic legislation cannot free the UK of its legal obligations on the international plane. In this short video Professor Mark Elliott explores the legal and constitutional implications of the Bill. Mark Elliott is Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of St Catharine's College, Cambridge. From 2015 to 2019, he served as Legal Adviser to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, providing advice to the Committee on a range of legislative and other matters. Mark co-founded the international biennial Public Law Conference series and co-convened the first two conferences. He is the recipient of a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in teaching and is the author of a widely read blog http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ that is aimed at public law scholars, current and prospective law students, policy-makers, and others who are interested in the subject. For more information about Professor Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at: https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill seeks to circumvent the UK Supreme Court's recent judgment holding the Government's Rwanda policy, concerning the removal of certain asylum-seekers, to Rwanda. The Bill contemplates placing the UK in breach of its international obligations, including under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Refugee Convention, while forming part of a policy that relies upon Rwanda's adherence to its own international obligations. The Bill is thus at once hypocritical and parochial, given that domestic legislation cannot free the UK of its legal obligations on the international plane. In this short video Professor Mark Elliott explores the legal and constitutional implications of the Bill. Mark Elliott is Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of St Catharine's College, Cambridge. From 2015 to 2019, he served as Legal Adviser to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, providing advice to the Committee on a range of legislative and other matters. Mark co-founded the international biennial Public Law Conference series and co-convened the first two conferences. He is the recipient of a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in teaching and is the author of a widely read blog http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ that is aimed at public law scholars, current and prospective law students, policy-makers, and others who are interested in the subject. For more information about Professor Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at: https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill seeks to circumvent the UK Supreme Court's recent judgment holding the Government's Rwanda policy, concerning the removal of certain asylum-seekers, to Rwanda. The Bill contemplates placing the UK in breach of its international obligations, including under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Refugee Convention, while forming part of a policy that relies upon Rwanda's adherence to its own international obligations. The Bill is thus at once hypocritical and parochial, given that domestic legislation cannot free the UK of its legal obligations on the international plane. In this short video Professor Mark Elliott explores the legal and constitutional implications of the Bill. Mark Elliott is Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow of St Catharine's College, Cambridge. From 2015 to 2019, he served as Legal Adviser to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, providing advice to the Committee on a range of legislative and other matters. Mark co-founded the international biennial Public Law Conference series and co-convened the first two conferences. He is the recipient of a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in teaching and is the author of a widely read blog http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ that is aimed at public law scholars, current and prospective law students, policy-makers, and others who are interested in the subject. For more information about Professor Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at: https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On the 15 November the UK Supreme Court decided that the United Kingdom's policy of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda was unlawful. In this short video Dr Kirsty Hughes explains the Court's reasoning, and considers the Government's response and possible next steps. Kirsty Hughes is an Associate Professor specialising in Human Rights Law. She is joint General Editor of the European Human Rights Law Review, Director of the Centre for Public Law, University of Cambridge, a member of Blackstone Chambers Academic Panel and Deputy Editor of Public Law. She is a co-convenor of the European Human Rights Law Conference. For more information about Dr Hughes, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/ke-hughes/2113 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On the 15 November the UK Supreme Court decided that the United Kingdom's policy of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda was unlawful. In this short video Dr Kirsty Hughes explains the Court's reasoning, and considers the Government's response and possible next steps. Kirsty Hughes is an Associate Professor specialising in Human Rights Law. She is joint General Editor of the European Human Rights Law Review, Director of the Centre for Public Law, University of Cambridge, a member of Blackstone Chambers Academic Panel and Deputy Editor of Public Law. She is a co-convenor of the European Human Rights Law Conference. For more information about Dr Hughes, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/ke-hughes/2113 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On the 15 November the UK Supreme Court decided that the United Kingdom's policy of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda was unlawful. In this short video Dr Kirsty Hughes explains the Court's reasoning, and considers the Government's response and possible next steps. Kirsty Hughes is an Associate Professor specialising in Human Rights Law. She is joint General Editor of the European Human Rights Law Review, Director of the Centre for Public Law, University of Cambridge, a member of Blackstone Chambers Academic Panel and Deputy Editor of Public Law. She is a co-convenor of the European Human Rights Law Conference. For more information about Dr Hughes, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/ke-hughes/2113 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

On the 15 November the UK Supreme Court decided that the United Kingdom's policy of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda was unlawful. In this short video Dr Kirsty Hughes explains the Court's reasoning, and considers the Government's response and possible next steps. Kirsty Hughes is an Associate Professor specialising in Human Rights Law. She is joint General Editor of the European Human Rights Law Review, Director of the Centre for Public Law, University of Cambridge, a member of Blackstone Chambers Academic Panel and Deputy Editor of Public Law. She is a co-convenor of the European Human Rights Law Conference. For more information about Dr Hughes, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/ke-hughes/2113 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On the 15 November the UK Supreme Court decided that the United Kingdom's policy of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda was unlawful. In this short video Dr Kirsty Hughes explains the Court's reasoning, and considers the Government's response and possible next steps. Kirsty Hughes is an Associate Professor specialising in Human Rights Law. She is joint General Editor of the European Human Rights Law Review, Director of the Centre for Public Law, University of Cambridge, a member of Blackstone Chambers Academic Panel and Deputy Editor of Public Law. She is a co-convenor of the European Human Rights Law Conference. For more information about Dr Hughes, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/ke-hughes/2113 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

On the 15 November the UK Supreme Court decided that the United Kingdom's policy of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda was unlawful. In this short video Dr Kirsty Hughes explains the Court's reasoning, and considers the Government's response and possible next steps. Kirsty Hughes is an Associate Professor specialising in Human Rights Law. She is joint General Editor of the European Human Rights Law Review, Director of the Centre for Public Law, University of Cambridge, a member of Blackstone Chambers Academic Panel and Deputy Editor of Public Law. She is a co-convenor of the European Human Rights Law Conference. For more information about Dr Hughes, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/ke-hughes/2113 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On the 15 November the UK Supreme Court decided that the United Kingdom's policy of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda was unlawful. In this short video Dr Kirsty Hughes explains the Court's reasoning, and considers the Government's response and possible next steps. Kirsty Hughes is an Associate Professor specialising in Human Rights Law. She is joint General Editor of the European Human Rights Law Review, Director of the Centre for Public Law, University of Cambridge, a member of Blackstone Chambers Academic Panel and Deputy Editor of Public Law. She is a co-convenor of the European Human Rights Law Conference. For more information about Dr Hughes, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/ke-hughes/2113 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

On the 15 November the UK Supreme Court decided that the United Kingdom's policy of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda was unlawful. In this short video Dr Kirsty Hughes explains the Court's reasoning, and considers the Government's response and possible next steps. Kirsty Hughes is an Associate Professor specialising in Human Rights Law. She is joint General Editor of the European Human Rights Law Review, Director of the Centre for Public Law, University of Cambridge, a member of Blackstone Chambers Academic Panel and Deputy Editor of Public Law. She is a co-convenor of the European Human Rights Law Conference. For more information about Dr Hughes, please refer to her profile at https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/ke-hughes/2113 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes.

In each episode of Season 2, we'll tell the story of a great landmark court decision from Australia or around the world. This week: terrorism on the streets of Gibraltar and the right to life, in the European Court of Human Rights' decision in McCann and Others v United Kingdom (21 ECHR 97 GC). McCann v UK (1995) European Convention on Human RightsLearn more about the ANU College of Law here. Our thanks to the ANU College of Law Marketing and Communications team. ANU acknowledges and celebrates the First Australians on whose traditional lands we meet, and pays our respect to elders past and present. 

The post-World War 2 period saw the emergence of several peace-keeping institutions. The Council of Europe is one such international organization tasked with the responsibility to uphold democracy, human rights, and the rule of law throughout Europe. In times of war, the world bears witness to an overwhelming breach of human rights–Russia's recent war against Ukraine is a case in point. During these difficult times, how does this organization–where expulsion of member states as punishment also means removing them from its purview of justice–maintain its integrity and fulfil its role?In the latest episode of War and Peace, Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou, Professor in Human Rights Law at the University of Liverpool, and Vassilis P Tzevelekos, Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Liverpool and a Member of the UN Human Rights Council Advisory Committee, put forth the suggestion that with the change in international law over the years, stricter sanctions should be in place to prevent human rights atrocities. They discuss this in context of their work “The Aggression Against Ukraine and the Effectiveness of Inter-state Cases in Case of War”, published by Brill.Guests: Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou and Vassilis P TzevelekosHost: Leigh Giangreco

Refugees in Greece face violence and forcible expulsion to Turkey. Critics say this is a clear contravention of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Lauterpacht Centre for International Law (LCIL), University of Cambridge hosts a regular Friday lunchtime lecture series on key areas of International Law. Previous subjects have included UN peacekeeping operations, the advisory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the crime of aggression, whaling, children and military tribunals, and theories and practices for proving individual criminal responsibility for genocide and crimes against humanity. This lecture, entitled 'The Christian origins of European human rights law, 1899-1950', was delivered at the Lauterpacht Centre on Friday 27th November 2017 by Marco Duranti, Lecturer in Modern European and International History at the University of Sydney, Australia.

Prior to the 2015 general election, the Conservative Party undertook in its manifesto to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 and to enact a British Bill of Rights. In this video, Mark Elliott addresses three key questions raised by these proposals: First, what lies behind the desire of some politicians to secure the Human Rights Act’s repeal? Second, how might a British Bill of Rights differ from the present legislation? And, third, what constitutional obstacles might lie in the way of the implementation of these reforms? In relation to the last of those three issues, the argument is developed that although the UK Parliament has the legal power to legislate for the proposed changes, the increasingly multi-layered nature of the British constitution limits Parliament’s capacity to exploit its sovereign legislative authority. In particular, the constraining effects of international law - in the form of the European Convention on Human Rights - and the devolved nature of the modern British constitution are likely to limit the UK Government’s room for manoeuvre. As a result, it is likely to be difficult to deliver upon the manifesto commitments that were made in a legally coherent and constitutionally legitimate manner. Dr Mark Elliott is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of St Catharine's College. His main research interests are in the fields of constitutional and administrative law. Dr Elliott's recent publications include Elliott and Thomas, Public Law (2nd ed OUP 2014); Elliott, Beatson, Matthews and Elliott's Administrative Law: Text and Materials (OUP 2011, 4th edition); and Forsyth, Elliott, Jhaveri, Scully-Hill and Ramsden (eds), Effective Judicial Review: A Cornerstone of Good Governance (OUP 2010). Dr Elliott was the 2011 Legal Research Foundation Visiting Scholar at The University of Auckland, New Zealand. In 2010, he was awarded a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in University teaching. He writes a blog - http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ - which includes information for people applying, or thinking of applying, to study Law at university. For more information about Dr Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

Prior to the 2015 general election, the Conservative Party undertook in its manifesto to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 and to enact a British Bill of Rights. In this video, Mark Elliott addresses three key questions raised by these proposals: First, what lies behind the desire of some politicians to secure the Human Rights Act’s repeal? Second, how might a British Bill of Rights differ from the present legislation? And, third, what constitutional obstacles might lie in the way of the implementation of these reforms? In relation to the last of those three issues, the argument is developed that although the UK Parliament has the legal power to legislate for the proposed changes, the increasingly multi-layered nature of the British constitution limits Parliament’s capacity to exploit its sovereign legislative authority. In particular, the constraining effects of international law - in the form of the European Convention on Human Rights - and the devolved nature of the modern British constitution are likely to limit the UK Government’s room for manoeuvre. As a result, it is likely to be difficult to deliver upon the manifesto commitments that were made in a legally coherent and constitutionally legitimate manner. Dr Mark Elliott is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of St Catharine's College. His main research interests are in the fields of constitutional and administrative law. Dr Elliott's recent publications include Elliott and Thomas, Public Law (2nd ed OUP 2014); Elliott, Beatson, Matthews and Elliott's Administrative Law: Text and Materials (OUP 2011, 4th edition); and Forsyth, Elliott, Jhaveri, Scully-Hill and Ramsden (eds), Effective Judicial Review: A Cornerstone of Good Governance (OUP 2010). Dr Elliott was the 2011 Legal Research Foundation Visiting Scholar at The University of Auckland, New Zealand. In 2010, he was awarded a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in University teaching. He writes a blog - http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ - which includes information for people applying, or thinking of applying, to study Law at university. For more information about Dr Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

The segment of the BBC Radio Cambridgeshire Drivetime programme broadcast on 3 October 2014 featuring Dr Mark Elliott discussing Conservative proposals to the UK's relationship with the European Convention on Human Rights. Provided courtesy of the BBC.

The segment of the BBC Radio Cambridgeshire Drivetime programme broadcast on 3 October 2014 featuring Dr Mark Elliott discussing Conservative proposals to the UK's relationship with the European Convention on Human Rights. Provided courtesy of the BBC.

The segment of the BBC Radio Cambridgeshire Drivetime programme broadcast on 3 October 2014 featuring Dr Mark Elliott discussing Conservative proposals to the UK's relationship with the European Convention on Human Rights. Provided courtesy of the BBC.

The segment of the BBC Radio Cambridgeshire Drivetime programme broadcast on 3 October 2014 featuring Dr Mark Elliott discussing Conservative proposals to the UK's relationship with the European Convention on Human Rights. Provided courtesy of the BBC.

On 3 March 2014, Judge Nicholas Forwood delivered a lecture entitled "Protecting Individual Rights: Role of the General Court of Justice of the EU" as a guest of the Cambridge University Students' Pro Bono Society. Judge Forwood is the British judge in the General Court of Justice of the European Union, and spoke about how this institution can protect individual rights and about the recent developments in the area of European Human Rights law. More information about the Society is available from the website at http://www.cambridgeprobono.bravesites.com/

On 3 March 2014, Judge Nicholas Forwood delivered a lecture entitled "Protecting Individual Rights: Role of the General Court of Justice of the EU" as a guest of the Cambridge University Students' Pro Bono Society. Judge Forwood is the British judge in the General Court of Justice of the European Union, and spoke about how this institution can protect individual rights and about the recent developments in the area of European Human Rights law. More information about the Society is available from the website at http://www.cambridgeprobono.bravesites.com/

On 3 March 2014, Judge Nicholas Forwood delivered a lecture entitled "Protecting Individual Rights: Role of the General Court of Justice of the EU" as a guest of the Cambridge University Students' Pro Bono Society. Judge Forwood is the British judge in the General Court of Justice of the European Union, and spoke about how this institution can protect individual rights and about the recent developments in the area of European Human Rights law. More information about the Society is available from the website at http://www.cambridgeprobono.bravesites.com/

Judge Dean Spielmann, the President of the European Court of Human Rights, spoke about "Human Rights in Europe" on 22nd February 2013 at Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge. Judge Spielmann is a Fitzwilliam alumni and was elected President of the European Court of Human Rights. He took up his duties on 1 November 2012. Since graduating at Fitzwilliam, Dean Spielmann has been a member of the Luxembourg Bar and assistant lecturer in Criminal Law at Louvain University. He has been a Section President of the ECHR since February 2011, elected in respect of Luxembourg. The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 by the Council of Europe Member States, to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. The event has been kindly sponsored by Herbert Smith Freehills, CMS Cameron McKenna, and Allen & Overy.

Judge Dean Spielmann, the President of the European Court of Human Rights, spoke about "Human Rights in Europe" on 22nd February 2013 at Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge. Judge Spielmann is a Fitzwilliam alumni and was elected President of the European Court of Human Rights. He took up his duties on 1 November 2012. Since graduating at Fitzwilliam, Dean Spielmann has been a member of the Luxembourg Bar and assistant lecturer in Criminal Law at Louvain University. He has been a Section President of the ECHR since February 2011, elected in respect of Luxembourg. The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 by the Council of Europe Member States, to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. The event has been kindly sponsored by Herbert Smith Freehills, CMS Cameron McKenna, and Allen & Overy.

Judge Dean Spielmann, the President of the European Court of Human Rights, spoke about "Human Rights in Europe" on 22nd February 2013 at Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge. Judge Spielmann is a Fitzwilliam alumni and was elected President of the European Court of Human Rights. He took up his duties on 1 November 2012. Since graduating at Fitzwilliam, Dean Spielmann has been a member of the Luxembourg Bar and assistant lecturer in Criminal Law at Louvain University. He has been a Section President of the ECHR since February 2011, elected in respect of Luxembourg. The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 by the Council of Europe Member States, to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. The event has been kindly sponsored by Herbert Smith Freehills, CMS Cameron McKenna, and Allen & Overy.

Judge Dean Spielmann, the President of the European Court of Human Rights, spoke about "Human Rights in Europe" on 22nd February 2013 at Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge. Judge Spielmann is a Fitzwilliam alumni and was elected President of the European Court of Human Rights. He took up his duties on 1 November 2012. Since graduating at Fitzwilliam, Dean Spielmann has been a member of the Luxembourg Bar and assistant lecturer in Criminal Law at Louvain University. He has been a Section President of the ECHR since February 2011, elected in respect of Luxembourg. The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 by the Council of Europe Member States, to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. The event has been kindly sponsored by Herbert Smith Freehills, CMS Cameron McKenna, and Allen & Overy.

Baroness Helena Kennedy, QC delivered the Annual Isaiah Berlin Lecture on law and globalization at Wolfson College. The lecture was introduced by Acting President of the College, Christina Redfield. The leading human rights lawyer Baroness Helena Kennedy gave a stirring defence of the principle of universal human rights when she delivered the Annual Isaiah Berlin Lecture on law and globalization at Wolfson College. She took as the starting point for her lecture the global economic crisis, which clearly demonstrated the importance of accepted norms to regulate today's interconnected world, and the need for the law to cross national borders to hold wrongdoers to account in the globalized marketplace. Addressing issues such as the position and treatment of women, same-sex rights, immigration, and asylum policy, Baroness Kennedy charted the development of the idea of universal human rights to better understand the controversy it attracts today. She offered the salutary reminder that the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was drafted at the urging of Winston Churchill as a way of unifying people behind principles that would prevent the type of atrocities that had taken place in the Second World War. This effort to embed values in law was not intended to create global law, she explained, but to bring about a template against which national laws can be measured. Whilst acknowledging that developing nations may see human rights as a preoccupation of the wealthy, she vigorously defended human rights discourse against the claims of cultural relativism, which relegates human values below the claims of local culture. Strict cultural relativism, she argued, can often be a justification for human rights abuse, and uncritical acceptance of cultural relativism prevents us from examining the very societal structures that create the cultural norm.