the remains of one of the two bodies found in the remote amazon rainforest is that of missing britishjournalist dom phillips. a second body is still under analysis. now on bbc news, it's dateline london with sean ley. hello and welcome to the programme which brings together leading uk commentators with the foreign correspondence who write, blog and broadcast to audiences in their own countries from the dateline london. this week, what does international law amount to? on tuesday, judges in british courts

decided it was permissible to fly would—be asylum seekers to rwanda in east africa because, if the policy is subsequently ruled unlawful, the british government can be relied upon to bring them back again. it was a judge on the european court of human rights whose intervention prevented the flight taking off at all. a day later, lord geidt became the second independent ethics adviser in succession to the prime minister to resign. the government was considering paying subsidies to steel manufacturers in the uk in breach of the rules of the world trade organization. the code says ministers should not break the law. downing street was considering suspending it and asked for his advice. for lord geidt, this was the last straw. on friday, borisjohnson escaped these domestic distractions to spend the day in kyiv. these domestic distractions he is one of the allies of ukraine championing international law as a tool to bring to account rations for actions taken

nations for actions taken during the invasion. this week, investigators from the un human rights council said they may have found evidence of serious breaches of international law, which perhaps amount to war crimes. but will this part of international law ever be enforced? we will discuss those three aspects. in the studio, ian birrell, who writes for the mail on sunday and is freshly returned from a lengthy spell in the donbas region of ukraine. latika bourke is a columnist for the age of melbourne and the sydney morning herald. she has spent much of a month stomping through australia covering the election campaign there. and jeffrey kofman has been a news anchor in both his native canada and the united states a war correspondent. thank you all for coming, good good to see you. a bit of a relief from the hot temperatures outside in london as we record this programme. jeffrey, let's begin with rwanda. tell us what happened to what britain says is a ground—breaking, revolutionary new asylum policy, sending asylum seekers

who want to come and live in the uk to rwanda instead. i tell you what did not happen, europe did not meddle in british law. that's what borisjohnson and his supporters want us to believe, that this is another european incursion. that is not what happened. a couple of observations here. one, they tried to send asylum seekers to rwanda to deter them from coming across the camera, to say, not worth it, stay in france, stay in the continent. they knew it wasn't legal. they are pushing this... this is about protecting britain, the same rhetoric as brexit, and they are simply doing it for posturing, flight ready to go, half an hour before, the european human rights court said no, you can't do it. that is not the european union. winston churchill was a signatory to this, i think it was 1959. 46 nations, much larger than the european union, completely separate. it's the european council that

planned this, it came out of the ashes of the second world war as a court to defend human rights. that might confuse people, you said the european council. the european council is the body that runs... you mean the council of europe? council of europe. sorry... no, no, iam corrected. thank you for saying that. but the point being, only two countries has been expelled or have left the european human rights court. that was russia and greece when it was under a dictatorship. borisjohnson is saying, well, maybe we shouldn't be part of it either. this is posturing for the election. but let's be clear. you talk about this country and the rule of law, setting an example and how do we talk about russia and human rights incursions, etc... there is a class in this country, and i say this as somebody who has lived here for 12 years, that thinks it is entitled to do as it wishes and ignore the law. we saw this with partygate. now we are seeing it again. that we don't have to follow human

rights law, we can do it on our own. that is a consistent theme in this government. i want to pick up on that, in truth, international human rights law is kind of voluntary. people have chosen to adopt this. but because there is no sanction and no actual enforcement, it is something we have chosen to follow, we are not obliged. it is not part of our system. of course, but the court was saying they are waiting until there has been a judicial review, and the judicial process in the uk is finished. they were saying, go to your own system and we can take it from there. butjeffrey is right, the government have had a success out of this, they had what they wanted, they wanted to start a fuss, they wanted to cause a smoke screen. the reality is they have a policy, a system which is not working very well for them. 72% of people coming win their cases, another half or so win them on asylum. the number of people being sent home or forcibly evacuated has fallen to a 20th of the peak in 2005. the government's policy is not working, they needed a smoke screen and they got exactly what they wanted, a big fuss,

a big furore and a big fight. can i pick up on your point about thejudge at the european court of human rights effectively saying, look, go back and get it tested before you try and do it, because it doesn't look lawful? in a sense, they were jumping in when you might argue domestic judges should have acted. in other words, they were saying, hang on a minute, that is really something the british judges should have done. it's an arguable point, isn't it? well, it's going to be tested in a court of law in the uk, but of course, again, one of the themes with boris johnson and priti patel, the home secretary, is to be able to blame lefty lawyers, who they attack, and this gives them another excuse to blame the lefty lawyers for stopping them doing what they want. the whole thing is a ridiculous smoke screen. if they want to tackle the asylum, they can do so, as france suggested, they could process on french soil, they could have a more effective system in the uk. we desperately need an efficient asylum system, and we don't have it.

instead we get these ridiculous stunts. latika, 28,526 people made it to britain last year on this route, 45 people either went missing or died attempting to do so. so you can see statistically why people might carry on coming, although it is very dangerous water, one of the most crowded waterways in the world, actually the risk to life is proportionally relatively low. terrible what happened to that a5, but proportionally it's quite a low figure. australia had exactly this problem of offshoring. it tried to offshore, and australia, it seemed to work. well, if you look to australia, this is playing out perfectly. for the british conservatives here, because this issue dominated - at least three or four elections. and it is now the case in australia,

it's lethal to go to an election - saying you would unwind the border protection policies. _ you would not win government. and the long saga of this has been drawn out over the last two - decades in australia. we had what was called the pacific solution. - asylum seekers who came by boat, only those who came by boat, - from indonesia, they would be sent to detention centres, _ first on shore, but then under the pacific solution, _ detention centres on naura and papua new guinea. - now that did pretty much stop, slow the boat to minimal- numbers, not completely. in 2007, the labour party went to the election and won saying i we are going to unwind thisl inhumane, immoral system. and they did. and the boats came back with ferocity. i and this arguably killed i their re—election chances two elections later. because when the boatsj came back with ferocity, we had this spectacle of people dying at sea _ the labour government came up with its own refugee _ swap plan with malaysia,

in 2013, but the high - court knocked it down. but that enabled the conservative government in australia, - when it won power, to essentially rip up all international law. - international law in- australia is not adhered to. and they then began to turn back the boats, to tow- them back to indonesia. they put them in orangel lifeboats and said, it's up to you if you get back safely. they would be given enough fuel to make it to indonesia. - so that's ultimately in australia's case what stopped the boats. - so in the end, international law didn't count for anything because they were signatories to all these conventions but they decided, for their domestic political reasons, that was going to be... but it's fair to say, as you said, the policy worked in its own terms. absolutely. it stopped people coming, it made it so unpleasant, the chances of ever getting to australia... i think this is an - important distinction. deterrence didn't - completely stop boats. there is lots of research i and statistics to show this, because even after labour unwound the pacific solution then _ tried to reinstate it, _ that still never stopped the boats. it was messaging and campaigns

in all these areas to tell people i not to come on a boat, - you won't get to australia, you could die. it didn't stop them. i don't think the parallel can hold for a number of reasons. a key point, people in this country are not talking about asylum seekers as an invasion of their shores, as they were before the exit. he is full armada, that is what they would call him in australia... - this is not a prominent issue right now in this country. there are so many other issues... i strongly disagree with that. i think borisjohnson is desperately looking for issues to polarise people and galvanise his base. one of the critical issues about why boris johnson's leadership - was destabilised was red wall mps acting on this issue. _ because in their electorates, there are hotels filled - with asylum seekers that are not being processed. j quite often they've been transferred from the south—east up the country. and they are there for months. this is more an issue of home office

processing at this point, _ because people are living in hotels. but what that means is there . is a lot of community backlash. the australian lesson - on the populist politics of this shows that, for as long as this goes on like this, the conservatives - will win this argument. and you will note that labour here is not saying, hey, - we are not going to reverse... i still don't think this is a one issue country in the same way. there is another issue, which is that, at a time when we are fighting a war against a dictatorship, we are outsourcing refugees to the most overcrowded country in africa, to a dictatorship — someone who came to power as president in the same year as putin, a former spy chief like putin, who has a track record of invading other countries, of ripping off assets from other countries, like putin, a track record of repression and stifling free expression, eliminating rivals... all these things, the hypocrisy is utterly grotesque. the idea we are doing this deal with a dictatorship like rwanda, it sticks in my throat. the other thing to warn about here, australia has a huge cultural-

anxiety with border. it would be a real shame to see the united kingdom, an open, i progressive society, i move down that route. during the pandemic, australia locked out l its citizens and no one cared. this was because it was a directj transposition of the politics that had played out against others, refugees, anyone outside - the country, and that has now- morphed into a treatment of anyone who is offshore. that would be really, - really sad and tragic to see britain follow that. the issue here is complicated. asylum seekers are meant to claim asylum in the first country they land in, which is often greece or italy. which have a much bigger problem than the uk. uk is in the luxurious position of being an island surrounded by european first world countries. in canada, the same issue. you don't get mexican refugees crossing the border into canada. these countries are insulated, so they become countries of opportunity, the uk is an english—speaking country,

a prosperous capitalist economy, and ultimately an easier place to blend in if you are from... particularly without an identity card system. on the streets of france, you might get stopped. exactly, so people will cross over. even though they could take refugee status in france, france have made it difficult, and so you have the flood coming in here. they are just very different situations, australia and the uk, and i don't think the parallel can be taken too closely. we will park this conversation here, it's one we are certainly going to come back to. let's talk about ukraine, ian. borisjohnson was there on friday, a surprise visit. on thursday, olaf scholz, his first visit to ukraine, he had been criticised for not going. macron was back there again, and mario draghi was with him from italy. on the surface, you would think everything's fine, the alliance is strong, everyone is standing by ukraine, ukraine want more weapons and they want them yesterday, but that's perfectly understandable.

iwonder, though, having been in ukraine for, what, 17 weeks or something, and having been there in 2014 when this war really began with the green men, the supposed mysterious figures who turned out to be russian special forces coming in and, it was said, destabilising the donbas region. what is your sense of this? we are in a pivotal moment right now, the war has changed shape, we all know that. it has become a lot more brutal in donbas, a lot more attritional. the russians are learning from their initial mistakes. the ukraine reaction has been incredible, amazing. i have been there since january, and to see the way this country took on this existential threat from the world's second biggest army, and the whole country is basically geared towards fending off this threat, it has been phenomenal. attitudes have really hardened, but at the same time, media interest worldwide is beginning to dwindle and that's frightening. putin is playing a long game and is hoping there will be cracks in the alliance.

we are seeing the rhetoric slightly changing in america. the reality is, actually, russia is still not doing that well. yes, they have made advances, the artillery bombardment is horrendous and the deaths on both sides are terrible, but actually, they still haven't taken severodonetsk which is a 100,000 city. they have taken mariupol by destroying it, they have taken kherson, they have taken bodyansk, but they haven't taken many urban centres. a lot of land but not many urban centres. if they want to take donbas, they have to take much bigger cities like slaoyansk and kramatorsk. like slovyansk and kramatorsk. so this is a pivotal moment where, if there is the right western support, and if the west does stay

united, if macron stops saying we can't humiliate putin, and if we support the ukrainians properly with the weapons they need, i still think something could change quite dramatically. the danger is people are bored, the attention goes elsewhere, the cost of living crisis arises, the grain situation is an issue around the world, and the alliance dissipates, putin exploits that, the ukrainians to some extent are abandoned, and even after their heroic fight against this invading power and the atrocities... when we talk about war crimes, the fact is it was a war crime to invade in 2014, a war crime to shoot down a civilian airliner, a war crime to take crimea, and it's a war crime to go back in again. the whole act is a war crime as well as all the individual atrocities we have seen left, right and centre. can i get a bit of clarification on geography, because i'm not clear and i suspect a lot of people listening won't be either. the donbas region, is that basically the area that includes both luhansk and donetsk, the self—declared republics? it's an eastern area, heavy mining industry, used to be quite prosperous. the two oblasts, luhansk

which is nearly captured apart from this tiny pocket of resistance around severodonetsk and another cityjust over the water, and then donetsk. but even in donetsk, the trenches i visited injanuary, in a place called ardivka, a few miles away from donetsk, still they are fighting over this tiny little place which they captured and were then pushed out of in 2014. they are still fighting now, the russians haven't managed to capture even that. so it's still a war, and wars can go on a long time, but there is still a huge amount to play for, which is why western support is so important to back ukraine properly, which still really some countries are not doing. jeffrey, on that, ian was talking about the mood starting to change, do you detect that? well, i think right now, the obsession is on the january the sixth hearings in the us, if you look at the american newscasts right now, it's all about did trump commit treason, can he go to trial etc. it's natural, we know this as journalists and as consumers

of media, that stories slip down if they start to have a sameness to them. the shock value of this story unfortunately diminishes, doesn't it? i completely agree with ian. this is a test of western solidarity. having committed so much, understanding this is not really an attack on ukraine, it's an attack on europe and western values, there is no going back for the west. the west has to support ukraine. my question, and ian, i am glad you are out safely, perhaps you have a better understanding of this, it's now i think 114 days since this began, ukraine has done far better than we expected, its military is far more resilient and professional than people gave it credit for. but they have got to be exhausted now. also seeing staggering numbers of injuries and deaths now. do they have the depth, the manpower

to actually sustain this war, even if they have the weapons given to them from the west? i think the big issue, really, is the economics. it is easy to forget economics in this situation. the attitude and desire is still there to save their country. the support is there. it's impossible to know the personnel issues because you are not getting that, there is propaganda on both sides and we don't really know. the critical question is the economy is so shot to pieces, there is nojobs, no money, people are tired, the air raid sirens go through the night so you are not sleeping well in places. a real danger, just like the western alliance, is whether that incredible alliance that has got behind zelensky who has performed so heroically in the way he has reacted, whether that alliance can hold within ukraine as well when people are just tired and exhausted. but at the moment... when i left, you still detect this incredible feeling that the whole country is geared towards saving themselves and supporting the people on the front line.

latika, you mentioned the economics, i wonder about the economics from the western point of view. a lot of people making sacrifices, nothing like the sacrifices the ukrainians are making, but a lot of people are making sacrifices. they did it in the belief that it would accelerate the end of this war. if russia's economy was cut off, if we were not buying the oil and oil and gas and therefore not funding the war machine, that in the end, it would cause putin to negotiate all his regime putin to negotiate or his regime would collapse and his troops would be brought home. it looks like that isn't going to happen, and i wonder at what point people in the west start to say to their politicians, look, it was a good try, you thought it would help, it's clearly not making enough of a difference. meanwhile, we are suffering really badly, there has to be a different way. i think that is going to come

sooner rather than later, . because the basic factors in all our countries, look| at the us, australia and britain... everything is the same l story, inflation soaring, cost of living soaring, - labour shortages soaring. governments are going to deal. with a very bad hands for the next three to five years minimum. so let's have this conversation - in six months when we are all cold, energy bills are skyrocketing, and we can't afford some - of the things we were - affording, say, even today. the other thing i really fear. is the media narrative like this idea of the mighty fox - against the lion when it was zelensky against putin in the early days, and i worry in that too many minds of the world who only checked l into the story when the war began, i they have already banked a semi win for ukraine, they think— the outcome is set. that would be fatal for us all. we australians certainly know that this war is for all of us. l because china will be very inspired if putin succeeds. last week, of course, we saw china's... that is why it is so important, because it is a fight against dictatorship globally,

and last week we saw china reiterate their support for the first time with putin, and they also seemed to change the law to allow a bit more leeway in mounting a similar type of attack. it's so significant what is happening in china, it's so significant what is happening in china, and that is why it is so important for everyone. and don't forget also, i there are still significant countries that are completely, let's not say fine, but have - not criticised putin. india, very key to this. a quad member with us in australia... - they share intelligence, canada... the same strategic interests at heart. i brazil, another really important player that has not come - out on the west's side. south africa, another. exactlx _ some of these games we believe we have made are not as big. - we have about three minutes to end to talk about lord geidt, the kind of figure most people would not have heard of, a former military officer, intelligent man, then he worked for the queen and was draughted

in after borisjohnson�*s last decided priti patel hadn't broken the ministerial code when she was accused of bullying staff, for which she apologised, and therefore didn't have to resign. lord geidt has now gone, and he says it was the last straw, he was being scouted, would it be all right if we suspended the ministerial code to allow us to do something in world trade, which is not in itself interesting? he issued another letter on friday. he said it was an example of what might constitute deliberate creatures he said it was an example of what might constitute deliberate creatures by he said it was an example of what might constitute deliberate creatures by the he said it was an example of what might constitute deliberate creatures by the uk he said it was an example of what might constitute deliberate creatures by the uk of he said it was an example of what might constitute deliberate creatures by the uk of its obligations under international law, given the government's widely publicised openness to it. it's a pretty damaging verdict. it publicised openness to it. it's a pretty damaging verdict.- publicised openness to it. it's a pretty damaging verdict. it is, but i don't think— pretty damaging verdict. it is, but i don't think most _ pretty damaging verdict. it is, but i don't think most people - pretty damaging verdict. it is, but i don't think most people will - pretty damaging verdict. it is, butl i don't think most people will know about_ i don't think most people will know about lord — i don't think most people will know about lord geidt, _ i don't think most people will know about lord geidt, and _ i don't think most people will know about lord geidt, and i— idon't think most people will know about lord geidt, and i think- i don't think most people will know about lord geidt, and i think most| about lord geidt, and i think most of the _ about lord geidt, and i think most of the damage _ about lord geidt, and i think most of the damage to _ about lord geidt, and i think most of the damage to boris _ about lord geidt, and i think most of the damage to boris johnson i about lord geidt, and i think most. of the damage to boris johnson about party gate _ of the damage to boris johnson about party gate is — of the damage to boris johnson about party gate is locked _ of the damage to boris johnson about party gate is locked in. _ of the damage to boris johnson about party gate is locked in. if— of the damage to boris johnson about party gate is locked in. if you - party gate is locked in. if you think— party gate is locked in. if you think you _ party gate is locked in. if you think you should _ party gate is locked in. if you think you should quit, - party gate is locked in. if you think you should quit, you i party gate is locked in. if youl think you should quit, you will party gate is locked in. if you - think you should quit, you will not change _ think you should quit, you will not change your— think you should quit, you will not

change your view— think you should quit, you will not change your view regardless - think you should quit, you will not change your view regardless of. think you should quit, you will not. change your view regardless of lord geidt's _ change your view regardless of lord geidt's decision. _ change your view regardless of lord geidt's decision. i'm _ change your view regardless of lord geidt's decision. i'm amused - change your view regardless of lord geidt's decision. i'm amused by- change your view regardless of lord | geidt's decision. i'm amused by this british— geidt's decision. i'm amused by this british idea — geidt's decision. i'm amused by this british idea that _ geidt's decision. i'm amused by this british idea that you _ geidt's decision. i'm amused by this british idea that you would - geidt's decision. i'm amused by this british idea that you would have - geidt's decision. i'm amused by this british idea that you would have anl british idea that you would have an ethics _ british idea that you would have an ethics adviser— british idea that you would have an ethics adviser politicians? - british idea that you would have an ethics adviser politicians? to - british idea that you would have an ethics adviser politicians? to be i ethics adviser politicians? to be honest, ethics adviser politicians? to be honest. being — ethics adviser politicians? to be honest, being boris _ ethics adviser politicians? to be honest, being boris johnson's i ethics adviser politicians?— honest, being borisjohnson's ethics adviser— honest, being borisjohnson's ethics adviser has— honest, being borisjohnson's ethics adviser has to be one of the world's worst— adviser has to be one of the world's worstiohsi — adviser has to be one of the world's worstjobs! the adviser has to be one of the world's worst “obs! , , adviser has to be one of the world's worst “obs! _ . ., , adviser has to be one of the world's worst jobs! worst “obs! the by elections coming u . worst “obs! the by elections coming u- on worst jobs! the by elections coming tip on thursday _ worst jobs! the by elections coming up on thursday will— worst jobs! the by elections coming up on thursday will be _ worst jobs! the by elections coming up on thursday will be a _ worst jobs! the by elections coming up on thursday will be a test - worst jobs! the by elections coming up on thursday will be a test of- up on thursday will be a test of what you are saying. if you read what you are saying. if you read what the pundits, the people who know more than i do about these things, they say there is a good chance they will be knocked out... it would be yet another setback for borisjohnson. the question i see withjohnson, it's a bit like covering trump, is very tipping point, is there a point at which he can't sustain it any more? 40% of his parliamentary caucus doesn't believe in him, but that wasn't enough. is this continued erosion, these by—elections, is there a point at which he simply has to go? but he

is not theresa may. she passed a similar boat and just gave in, she just realised she couldn't do it. i think his sense of entitlement is far greater. —— a similar as many as are of the opinion, say "aye". to the contrary, "no".. that is why it is so potent for the tories, they have an issue to revitalise themselves and bring back some of the... ., ., .,, ., ., the... immigration has fallen down the... immigration has fallen down the pecking — the... immigration has fallen down the pecking order. _ the... immigration has fallen down the pecking order. boris _ the... immigration has fallen down the pecking order. boris johnson i the... immigration has fallen down the pecking order. boris johnson isj the pecking order. borisjohnson is tolerated _ the pecking order. borisjohnson is tolerated by his party because he can win — tolerated by his party because he can win if— tolerated by his party because he can win. if you can't win, he won't be tolerated, _ can win. if you can't win, he won't be tolerated, simple as that. one of the by—elections is in the red wall where _ the by—elections is in the red wall where the — the by—elections is in the red wall where the labour used to be strong, the other— where the labour used to be strong, the other is— where the labour used to be strong, the other is against the lib dems... back— the other is against the lib dems... back there — the other is against the lib dems... back there next friday... martin will be in the chair next week at the same time. so my guest this week, thank you very much, and thanks for your company. goodbye.

hello. the weather is gradually transitioning to something cooler and fresher through the course of the weekend. over the past week temperatures in the south have been building. across england and wales yesterday brought the peak of the heatwave. the hottest spot was sent on down in suffolk, at 33 celsius. the hottest spot was santon downham in suffolk, at 33 celsius. the temperatures have been cooler and fresher for scotland and northern ireland. and that cooler, fresher air is sinking south today, so temperatures not as high as they were yesterday. still hot and humid in the far south—east.

some outbreaks of rain around. we have a front moving in from the north, and that is going to install itself through the rest of today across a central slice of england and wales, really. low pressure to the north of scotland. lots of isobars around there. quite a windy sort of day across northern, western scotland, breezy, too. for northern ireland. a few showers here in the far north—west. some spells of sunshine for scotland, northern england and northern ireland. a band of cloud further south bringing outbreaks of rain to lincolnshire, east anglia, towards wales and parts of south—west england as well but, to the south—east of that, dry with sunny spells and temperatures again in the mid to high 20s towards the south for most of us, we are in the mid to high teens, and possibly 20 degrees. heading through this evening and tonight, then, this band of rain in the south becomes heavy heavy and thundery at times with thunderstorms down towards kent, sussex and london through the first half of tonight. looks like those storms ease away for a while and then we turn our attention to the south—west, as the next batch of thunderstorms rattles in. for the channel islands and perhaps coastal parts of devon towards the isle of wight as well. a bit of a thundery, damp start in the far south, but, for most of us, a much more comfortable night for sleeping, with temperatures just

about down into single figures in a few spots. sunday, cooler, fresh conditions across almost all areas. plenty of dry, sunny weather on sunday but we will continue to see outbreaks of showery rain around the south coast and some southern counties of england in particular. elsewhere, mostly dry with a bit of a breeze coming in across the north and east of scotland. temperatures here around 13, 14 and further south, 18—21 in the sunshine but not as humid in the south as it has been. holding onto the showers in the far south—west through sunday evening but becoming mostly dry as we head into monday. a quick look into next week, and there could be a few spots of rain in the north—west with temperatures in the high teens to mid 20s. bye— bye.

this is bbc news — these are the latest headlines in the uk and around the world. the british government is to trial a scheme allowing asylum seekers who cross the english channel in small boats to be electronically tagged. when people come here illegally, when they break the law, it's important that we make that distinction. that's what we're doing with our rwanda policy, that is what we're doing with making sure asylum seekers can'tjust vanish into the rest of the country. an explosion and gunfire at a sikh temple in kabul — the latest attack on afghanistan's religious minorities. supermarkets and utility companies should be helping people struggling with soaring prices —

that's according to the uk government's new cost of living adviser.