It's not a question of how much control we have surrendered. It is the idea that we surrender any at all.
How does the idea of judges of a different nationality sit in the ECJ deciding on issues concerning the UK appear to you? It is unacceptable to half of the UK.
What nationality a judge is is of no importance, the number of judges can be. The two European courts have done nothing other than good for UK citizens, in many cases making up for the shortfalls of our own law and its implementation.
Our own legal system had become seriously flawed by a number of pieces of modern legislation, making for too many to be victims of it. Even the Home Office, which has a vested interest in pretending the legal system is working well, estimates that there are some 3000 wrongly convicted prisoners, that's 4% of the total. The creation of the Supreme Court is the only thing that's helped to alleviate the problems, as it has just shown in it's last ruling. But the Supreme Court alone is not sufficient to protect us from the defects, excesses and bigotry of government, and that's where the European courts are invaluable as they've so often showed.
Remember David Cameron suddenly deciding he wanted to scrap the Human Rights Act? The judgement of one man, a man whose judgment was so flawed that he stupidly called for the referendum, creating this current mess. He didn't even give his true reason for wanting to scrap the act, instead lying to us all.
And Michael Howard when he was Home Secretary arbitrarily increasing a court trial sentence of 8 years to 15 years, almost doubled merely because he thought that right. Fortunately the international and national fuss forced that to be stopped, but he almost got away with it.
And the recent Home Secretary who said "I don't care how many are wrongly convicted, just so long as there is not one abuser left on the streets".
Those are the sort of things we all need protection from still.
.
