What is the ECHR
The ECHR stands for ‘European Convention on Human Rights. It was drafted after the Second World War to enshrine a set of rights that would help fulfill the promise of ‘never again’ following the horrors perpetrated by several nation states upon millions of people.
Sidenote: don’t confuse it with the EHRC (Equalities and Human Rights Commission): same letters but in a different order.
Britain was one of the original architects of the ECHR, and the United Kingdom one of the first countries to ratify it in 1951. |
It’s not the same thing as the European Union |
The ECHR is a treaty between 46 European countries who are members of the Council of Europe.
The Council of Europe is separate to the EU, and indeed the similarly named ‘European Council’ which defines the general political direction of the EU.
I admit, this is confusing. It’s so confusing in fact that the Council of Europe has a page on its website called Do not get confused where it sets out all the other things people could very reasonably get confused about. |
What rights are enshrined in the ECHR? |
Member states accept international legal obligations to guarantee certain civil and political rights to people within their jurisdictions. These rights are set out in a series of articles and protocols and include:
Article 2: right to life Article 3: prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment Article 4: prohibition of slavery and forced labour Article 5: right to liberty and security Article 6: right to a fair trial Article 7: prohibition of retrospective criminal penalties Article 8: right to private and family life Article 9: freedom of thought, conscience and religion Article 10: freedom of expression Article 11: freedom of assembly and association Article 12: right to marry Article 13: right to an effective national remedy for breach of these rights Article 14: prohibition of discrimination in the protection of these rights
The UK has also ratified Protocol No. 13 to the convention on the abolition of the death penalty in all circumstances, as well as Protocol No. 1, which contains three additional rights:
right to free enjoyment of property right to education right to free and fair elections |
How is the ECHR upheld? |
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rules on individual or state applications when there are claims that there have been violations of the rights set out in the ECHR.
Opponents of the ECHR are often critical of the work of the Court. They argue that we are handing power to a foreign court in Strasbourg, but when you look at the numbers of cases from the United Kingdom that are heard by the Court, we are talking about a tiny and declining number of cases. This is clear from the Ministry of Justice’s most recent November 2024 report. 201 applications against the UK were made to the court in 2023, of which 172 were rejected as inadmissible. In the same year, there were just three judgements on UK cases of which only one declared there to have been a violation.
When you look at the numbers, it’s simply wrong to say that we are being ruled by a foreign court.
Sidenote: The 1998 Human Rights Act incorporated the ECHR into UK law. The aim was to “bring rights home”, this meant that people could enforce their rights in the domestic courts. |
Why the ECHR Matters 1: |
I was fortunate last week to attend a briefing where one of the guest speakers was Monica McWilliams who was at the table when the Good Friday Agreement was negotiated. She is clear that because the ECHR is woven through the Good Friday Agreement, leaving the ECHR would destabilise the Northern Ireland Peace Process. Even the UK government amending our interpretation of the ECHR (which Labour are proposing) would create issues with the Irish government.
Growing up in England in the 80’s and 90’s, I remember the Troubles being constantly on the news and the fear of bombings across the mainland too. At university I had friends from Northern Ireland who had lived through the Troubles firsthand. I was also at university when the Good Friday Agreement was signed. At the time it seemed as though the impossible had been achieved.
Risking the peace process in Northern Ireland is not a price worth paying. |
Why the ECHR Matters 2: |
When British soldiers were killed in Iraq because their vehicles and equipment weren’t up to scratch, their families wanted answers. How could this have happened, and could the Government be held responsible?
In 2013, the UK Supreme Court ruled that the Government could be challenged for failing to properly protect troops under the right to life (Article 2 of the ECHR). Even though these soldiers were serving in a theatre or war, the Court said the UK still had a duty to look after them.
This case showed that the ECHR doesn’t just protect people at home. Further, it has given ordinary families the power to hold the Government to account when things go badly wrong. |
Leaving the ECHR is not a golden ticket to tackle illegal migration |
The argument for leaving the ECHR is that it will help the UK government with its immigration and deportation woes. This is at best a dubious hope.
Leaving the ECHR is not a simple transaction that can (as some claim) be done and dusted within six months. It will lead to unpicking over a hundred international treaties. It would put us in the same boat as Russia, a rogue state that has no respect for human rights. Quite simply, it would erode Britain’s soft power.
Immigration law is very complex, however much we would like there to be a simple single solution to stopping the small boat crossings - there isn’t one. Leaving the ECHR is not the solution - or even part of the solution - and the consequences of leaving are far reaching - domestically and internationally.
It is not a price worth paying. |