The Observer’s deep dive into the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR Debate ) debate exposes something uncomfortable: much of what we’ve been told about human rights law blocking deportations is complete nonsense. Remember the Albanian criminal supposedly kept in Britain because his son didn’t like foreign chicken nuggets? Never happened. The Iranian who couldn’t be deported so he could cut his son’s hair? Fabricated. These myths have poisoned the political debate, yet politicians from Kemi Badenoch to Nigel Farage continue weaponising them.
The Positives:
The article’s fact-checking is thorough and necessary. Oxford University’s Bonavero Institute data reveals that only 0.73% of foreign national offenders successfully appeal deportation on human rights grounds. The Strasbourg court has ruled against the UK just three times in 45 years on immigration cases. These statistics demolish the narrative that the ECHR is some insurmountable barrier to border control.
The piece also provides valuable historical context—reminding us that British lawyers drafted the ECHR after World War II, and it’s helped secure justice for Hillsborough families and protected vulnerable people during the pandemic. The practical complications of withdrawal are clearly laid out: the Good Friday Agreement embeds the ECHR, and leaving it would reduce European cooperation on asylum seekers.
The Negatives:
What’s deeply concerning is the cynicism on display. Politicians across the spectrum are treating human rights as a “useful political scapegoat” (as Liberty’s Akiko Hart notes), offering “disingenuous solutions” they know won’t work. Reform UK’s promise of a “department of believers” staffed by anti-ECHR civil servants sounds dystopian. Even Labour MPs in red wall seats are signalling hostility to human rights to appear tough on immigration.
The article perhaps doesn’t emphasise enough how dangerous this erosion of principle is. As former Lord Chancellor Charlie Falconer warns, abandoning rights for immigrants sets a precedent:
“there is essentially no limitation on what the government may do in other areas where there is political pressure.”
For Keir Starmer—who once called the ECHR his “lodestar”—this represents a pivotal test. Will he defend fundamental rights against populist pressure, or will he join the race to the bottom? The answer matters far beyond immigration policy. When politicians compete to see who can abandon human rights fastest, we all lose.
#ECHR #HumanRights #UKPolitics #Immigration #FactCheck #BorderControl #AsylumSeekers #PoliticalDebate #LegalAnalysis #MythBusting #Brexit #ReformUK #Labour #Conservatives #UKImmigration #HumanRightsAct #GoodFridayAgreement #Deportation #PoliticalAccountability #UKNews
Links:
I have clearly stated many times that I found the departure from the EU to be a farce; so many lies, mistruths and out of it all we get the Brexit deal which is very close to scuppering the Good Friday Agreement. An agreement which is not perfect, has at least allowed the people of N Ireland to live relatively peacefully, and for the LGBTQ+ community to continue to fight for their rights, and most of the political parties now in N Ireland at least on paper support our community.
advisors advising them to do so!
But bringing the article back to LGBTQ+ politics, I am afraid that the DUP’s latest little foray into trying to win the LGBTQ+ vote is limp handed. A few words by one of the team which are almost repudiated the next day by the leader in terms of ‘others should be apologising to us’ does not indicate a party that has accepted us. To this, we can also add the continued delay by the Prime Minister (Rt Hon Boris Johnston) with one review after another, and nothing actually happens – reminds me of 
BRI
Over the next months, Brexit questions are going to start being raised which will need to be answered, for example:-
In America we have seen Donald Trump’s election win, and in the UK we have seen Brexit win out. Whilst we don’t know what the courts will say in terms of the Prime Minister’s rights, it is clear that the referendum has been taken and won and that the New Year will bring many changes, and that the far right seems to have gained ascendancy in terms of leaving Europe and also in terms of how we are supposed to ‘handle’ immigrants and other minorities.
