A week dominated by Brexit, ‘First Minister vs Prime Minister’ and the fall-out from the first judgments of the CJEU on religious manifestation…
As expected, on Monday the Commons rejected the Lords amendments to the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill, the Lords did not insist on their amendments and the bill passed. So after a total of 70 hours of debate, the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill completed its passage through Parliament and received Royal Assent on Thursday. The BBC reports that the Prime Minister is expected to wait until the end of the month formally to notify the EU of the UK’s intention to leave.
The blog is now receiving 800-1000 page-views per day; comments need reading and, sometimes, editing. That was not a problem when daily page-views were averaging about 400, but the process can now be fairly time-consuming. As such, we have reviewed our policy on comments. Continue reading →
The usual mix of the newsworthy, the obscure and the faintly ridiculous…
Historic abuse in Northern Ireland…
The final report of the Historical Institutional Abuse Inquiry has been submitted to the First Minister and Deputy First Minister and will be published on Friday 20 January (though whether Northern Ireland will still have an Executive on 20 January is another question entirely). The investigation, which started in 2013, has been chaired throughout by Sir Anthony Hart, a retired judge of the Northern Ireland High Court. It looked primarily into cases of abuse that took place in 22 residential homes for children between 1922 and 1995. Continue reading →
All else in 2016 paled into insignificance beside the vote for Brexit and the election of the next President of Trumpton. Needless to say, as a couple of grumpy OAPs raised in more liberal and rational times, we were not delighted at either outcome. Whether 2017 will be any better, who knows? Brexit will drag on and on, the situation in Syria will no doubt deteriorate further, Marine Le Pen might be the new President of France. Or the French electorate might have more sense and The Donald might not, after all, turn out to be as mad a box of frogs, though we aren’t holding our breath.
… said a commentator on a recent post, then went on to draw my attention to something I hadn’t even considered exploring because it didn’t seem to be particularly relevant to the issue I was discussing. So perhaps it’s time to attempt to explain what we think our brand of legal blogging is about. Continue reading →
Some thoughts on the “Meet the Editors and Bloggers” session at the LARSN Conference
Since June 2012, Law and Religion UK has provided a forum for what is billed as an “academically-rigorous exploration of the interactions between law and religion, together with the associated human rights issues”. This post is based on our own experience and explores what we believe to be the benefits and problems concomitant with the potential to communicate with up to one thousand potential readers through a couple of “clicks of the mouse”. Continue reading →
The forthcoming 2016 Law and Religion Scholars Network (LARSN) Conferenceon 5 and 6 May will include a plenary session, “Meet the authors and bloggers”, in which the editors of the Ecclesiastical Law Journal, Law & Justice and the Oxford Journal of Law & Religion – along with us – will discuss what we are looking for in terms of contributions (articles, comments and guest blogs), the focus of the journal / blog and how we see the study of Law and Religion developing. Coincidentally, on Easter Sunday we passed the 500,000 page-view milestone; so what follows is a prequel to our presentation, looking at the problems and pitfalls of communicating with up to a thousand potential readers through a couple of clicks of the mouse. Continue reading →