The United Kingdom has urged European leaders to implement significant modifications to human rights legislation as a means to address unlawful migration. Keir Starmer cautioned that a failure to adjust the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) could push voters towards divisive factions. However, critics argue that essential safeguards for individuals escaping persecution may be jeopardized if regulations are altered.
The UK government contends that two specific provisions of the ECHR – protections against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment and the right to family life – are being utilized to obstruct deportations. This pivotal pan-European law was established post-World War II, with Winston Churchill being a major proponent. Both the Conservative Party and Reform UK are advocating for the UK to withdraw from the ECHR entirely, a stance opposed by the Labour Party.
Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy emphasized to the Council of Europe that the ECHR should not impede efforts to combat illegal migration. Prior to the meeting, Keir Starmer and Danish counterpart Mette Frederiksen acknowledged that the current asylum framework is outdated in today’s world marked by extensive mobility.
Council of Europe Secretary-General Alain Berset indicated a willingness among members to consider adjusting the declaration, emphasizing the unanimous commitment to the ECHR and the European Court of Human Rights. However, concerns have been raised about the unprecedented challenges posed by migration and the dilemmas governments encounter in maintaining societies that serve their citizens effectively.
Mr. Lammy highlighted that the convention is fundamental for peace, stability, and security in Europe but stressed that it should evolve with the times. He proposed that the threshold for ‘inhuman and degrading treatment’ be limited to the most severe cases and that states have the authority to make reasonable decisions regarding the removal of foreign criminals.
Various advocacy groups have criticized proposals to amend the convention. Natasha Tsangarides from Freedom from Torture cautioned against alterations to Article 3, which includes an absolute prohibition on torture, inhuman, or degrading treatment. She emphasized the importance of upholding the ban on torture and ensuring that any revisions to Article 3 do not diminish its stringent provisions.
The government’s commitment to preserving the ECHR has been underscored amidst debates on potential adjustments, with a focus on maintaining the integrity of human rights protections.