Think getting rid of the EHCR is a good idea? What Human Right don't you want anymore?

TetleysTLDR: The Summary

Nigel Farage and Reform UK say leaving the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is about 'stopping the boats'. In reality, it would rip through almost every corner of law and politics.

Bottom line: It’s not just about asylum seekers. Exiting the ECHR is a constitutional wrecking ball that underpins Reform’s entire 'Contract': tearing up rights for workers, pensioners, migrants, protesters, journalists, and trade unions alike.

Immigration: Removes protections against torture, mass detention, family separation, and unfair trials.
Workers’ rights & unions: Destroys the legal backstop for collective bargaining and strikes.
Pensions & benefits: Ends proportionality checks when governments cut or change entitlements.
Police powers & surveillance: Reopens the door to blanket stop & search, mass DNA retention, and bulk spying.
Elections: Lets them curb postal voting and tinker with voting rules with fewer challenges.
Northern Ireland & devolution: Breaks the Good Friday Agreement and undermines devolved settlements, which are built on the ECHR.
Security cooperation with the EU: Triggers suspension of data-sharing, Europol access and policing cooperation.

A plea for sanity

You know, if you’re going to quote something as gospel, it’s always a useful thing to actually read it first. I wonder how many people in this country have ever sat down and read the European Convention on Human Rights. How many understand what its articles are, and how directly they affect them and their families. We’re not talking about abstract legal waffle here: we’re talking about the right to life, the right to liberty, the right to a fair trial, the right to family life, the right not to be tortured, the right to protest, and the right to free expression. Strip those away and you’re not left with some romantic idea of 'sovereignty' you’re left with naked power in the hands of politicians who have already shown they cannot be trusted.

And here’s the thing: the ECHR isn’t just about individual freedoms, it is pivotal to the very fabric of this country. It is woven into the Good Friday Agreement, the foundation of peace in Northern Ireland. Pulling out of it doesn’t just risk our rights here in England, Scotland, and Wales, it risks tearing up the fragile peace that ended decades of violence.

Do Reform UK Ltd and their cheerleaders even understand that? Or do they simply not care? Then we come to Reform UK Ltd's so-called 'contract': their big glossy promise to the people. I wonder how many of their voters have actually read that. I’d wager not many. Because if they did, they’d see that it isn’t a roadmap for freedom, it’s a con trick. A bundle of vague slogans dressed up as policy, designed to whip up anger and division while quietly stripping away the protections that stand between ordinary people and exploitation.

Reform UK Ltd's 'contract' is no more a contract than a betting slip is a banknote, it’s an IOU that only ever pays out to the rich and powerful.

So here’s the challenge: read the ECHR. Read what it actually says. Then read Reform’s contract. Compare them. One is a set of hard-won guarantees designed to stop governments trampling on people’s rights. The other is a piece of snake oil designed to let governments do exactly that. And then ask yourself, who do you really trust with your future, your family’s future, and your rights?

^{Would you buy a used car of these men?}

TetleysTLDR: The Article

The right wing in this country, fronted by snake oil salesmen in Reform UK Ltd but also including the less.savoury elements of the Conservative Party want us to pull out of the European Convention on Human Rights. The ECHR isn’t some abstract Brussels red tape, it affects every one of us. It underpins the right to a fair trial, protects against unlawful detention, upholds freedom of speech, defends workers from discrimination, and guarantees basic dignity in law. To walk away from it is to strip away the very safeguards that ordinary people rely on against an overreaching state. If you aren't horrified by this then you aren't paying attention.

Reform UK Ltd's 'Contract' pledges to 'Leave the European Convention on Human Rights' both to 'Stop the Boats' and as part of 'Constitutional Reform' alongside 'commence reform of the Human Rights Act' and a future 'British Bill of Rights' Reform Contract

Sky News and others have reported Farage saying a Reform government would take the UK out of the ECHR. Sky News

What leaving the ECHR really means

Treaty exit mechanics

The ECHR has a formal exit clause (Article 58) - a state may denounce the Convention by six months’ notice to the Council of Europe. (Russia’s exit in 2022 followed that timetable.) Institute for Government House of Commons Library

Human Rights Act (HRA) & domestic law

The HRA incorporates ECHR rights into UK law. Repeal/reform of the HRA plus ECHR exit removes the Convention’s direct pull on UK courts and the duty on public authorities to act compatibly with Convention rights (HRA s.6). House of Commons Library Legislation

Devolution & Good Friday/Belfast Agreement (GFA).

The GFA explicitly commits the UK to incorporate the ECHR with direct access to courts and remedies in Northern Ireland. Unpicking that would hit the peace settlement architecture. GOV.UK
NI Act 1998 s.6 bars the Assembly from legislating incompatibly with ECHR rights; similar ECHR-compatibility duties exist under the Scotland Act and Government of Wales Act. All would need amendment. Legislation Scottish Government Law Wales
The House of Commons Library flags these implications plainly. House of Commons Library

EU–UK policing & data cooperation (TCA)

The Trade & Cooperation Agreement conditions law-enforcement cooperation on ECHR adherence. If the UK denounces the ECHR (or Protocols 1, 6 or 13), Part Three can be terminated on a fast-track basis, risking loss of criminal data-sharing, surrender arrangements, Europol/Eurojust links, etc. European Parliament

Rule 39 'interim measures'

Strasbourg’s emergency orders (used in the Rwanda litigation) would no longer bind the UK post-exit; but domestic and other international-law constraints would still bite. Institute for Government Other treaties still exist. Many protections overlap with other UN conventions, yet they’re not directly enforceable in UK courts like the HRA is. Parliament’s researchers underline this. House of Commons Library

Q&A on the EHCR

What goes, who's hit and where Reform UK Ltd's contract collides

Key: HRA = Human Rights Act mechanism for enforcing the right domestically.
Examples show what UK law/policy has previously been forced to change or justify.

Art. 2 – Right to life	Positive duties to prevent loss of life & effectively investigate deaths (NI cases incl. Jordan v UK). Jordan v UK Guide to Article 2	Weaker duties around police shootings, custody deaths, disasters; fewer inquests forced by Art.2 standards.	Tough-on-crime agenda & policing leeway expands with fewer Art.2-driven constraints.
Art. 3 – No torture/inhuman treatment (absolute)	No deportation where real risk of torture/ill-treatment (Chahal v UK). Chahal v UK	Mass removals/offshoring face fewer hard stops; litigation shifts to thin domestic grounds.	Detain & deport, offshore processing, pick up boats & return to France. Reform Contract
Art. 4 – No slavery/forced labour	Modern slavery protections; trafficking victims’ treatment.	Dilutes a backstop against exploitative labour policies if domestic law is narrowed.	Employer Immigration Tax & labour market redesign risk weaker rights floor without Art.4 scrutiny. Reform Contract
Art. 5 – Liberty & security	Limits on detention; speedy court review; compensation for unlawful detention. ECHR	Immigration detention can expand with thinner safeguards; protest-related arrest/detention more defensible.	Contract promises secure detention for all illegal migrants and no legal aid for non-citizens. Reform Contract
Art. 6 – Fair trial	Independent tribunals; disclosure; equality of arms.	Curtailing legal aid (esp. for migrants) collides with fair-trial guarantees.	No legal aid for non-citizens. NationBuilder
Art. 7 – No punishment without law	Bars retroactive criminalisation.	Fewer external checks if Parliament pushes retrospective edge cases.	Sentencing crackdown rhetoric grows with fewer Strasbourg limits. Reform Contract
Art. 8 – Private/family life	Family unity in immigration, digital privacy; struck down UK stop & search without suspicion (Gillan & Quinton); DNA retention of innocents curtailed (S & Marper); bulk surveillance re-scoped (Big Brother Watch). Gillan & Quinton v UK	Deportations split families more easily; surveillance constraints loosen; police powers broaden.	Immigration plank; “Common sense policing,” anti-‘woke’ posture; BBC/data talk under “Bill of Rights.” Reform Contract
Art. 9 – Thought, conscience, religion	Religious accommodation in prisons/schools, etc.	Less leverage for minorities in services/employment.	Cultural war notes under “Reclaiming Britain.” Reform Contract
Art. 10 – Freedom of expression	Journalism & protest; surveillance chills speech (Big Brother Watch). HUDOC	Protest/press restrictions easier to push through.	“Common Sense Policing,” BBC overhaul. Reform Contract
Art. 11 – Assembly & association (incl. trade unions)	Union rights: UK lost in Wilson & Palmer (employers using inducements to ditch collective bargaining breached Art.11).	Workers’ rights floor drops; easier to curb strikes/collective bargaining without an ECHR backstop.	No explicit union plank, but deregulatory stance + DEI rollback fit an anti-worker tilt. Reform Contract
Art. 12 – Right to marry	Family law baselines.	Less supranational check on tinkering with family law edges.	—
Art. 13 – Effective remedy	A right to an effective domestic remedy for violations.	HRA repeal/rewrite neuters go-to remedy route.	They pledge to “reform the Human Rights Act.” Reform Contract
Art. 14 – Non-discrimination (linked to other rights)	Anti-discrimination lens across all rights.	Weakens challenges to differential treatment (e.g., migrants vs citizens).	“No legal aid for non-citizens,” DEI rollback.
Protocol 1, Art. 1 – Property	Pensions/benefits count as “possessions” (e.g., Stec v UK)—changes must be lawful/proportionate. Grand Chamber Decision	Pensions & social security protections thin; harder to challenge sudden rule changes.	Fiscal reforms bite with fewer constraints.
Protocol 1, Art. 2 – Education	Access & parental convictions rights.	School policy swings face fewer guardrails.	Culture-war education pledges easier to harden.
Protocol 1, Art. 3 – Free elections	Free expression of the people in choosing the legislature. Curtails arbitrary limits on voting methods. ECHR Portal	Curbing postal votes for most voters risks A3P1 litigation today; post-exit, fewer constraints.	Contract proposes stopping most postal voting.
Protocols 6 & 13 – Death penalty abolition	Ban in all circumstances (P13).	Denouncing these triggers fast-track termination of TCA Part Three (police/data cooperation). European Parliament

Immigration & “Stop the Boats.” The Contract hinges on ECHR exit + mass detention/deportation, offshoring, and slashing legal aid for migrants. That collides head-on with Arts 3, 5, 6, 8 and Rule 39 in today’s framework, hence the insistence on leaving. Reform Contract Institute for Government
Constitutional package. Alongside ECHR exit, Reform promise to re-write the HRA and to restrict postal voting, risking A3P1 (free elections) challenges while ECHR still applies. Reform Contract
Workers’ rights. With no Art.11 backstop (and Wilson & Palmer out of the frame internationally), it’s easier to squeeze unions/collective bargaining by statute or policy. TUC
Pensions & benefits. A1P1 has historically forced proportionality when governments move the goalposts. Remove the Convention/HRA, and judicial leverage falls away. Grand Chamber Decision
Policing & surveillance. Strasbourg rulings that trimmed over-broad stop & search and bulk surveillance (Art.8/10) lose their force; policy can swing back to wider state discretion. Gillan & Quinton v UK
Northern Ireland & devolution. The GFA commitment and devolved settlements are built on ECHR incorporation; Westminster would have to legislate through sensitive constitutional fabric to deliver Reform’s plan. GOV.UK Legislation Law Wales
Security cooperation with the EU. ECHR exit risks rapid suspension/termination of law-enforcement cooperation under the TCA, far beyond boats. European Parliament

Farage/Reform UK Ltd pitch ECHR exit as a migration fix. In reality it’s a constitutional sledgehammer: it rips into the GFA, devolution, EU security cooperation, and the legal backstops for workers’ rights, pensions, policing, surveillance, due process and elections. That’s not 'stopping the boats'; it’s pulling out the floorboards. Reform Contract House of Commons Library European Parliament

So you might think this is just about 'stopping the boats', because that’s the slogan plastered all over the tabloids, platformed on the TV and unchallenged by those presenters that interview Farage. but it’s far more than that. Pulling out of the ECHR would directly affect you, your family, and your children’s futures. These protections stop the government from locking you up without charge. They defend your right to a private life. They stop employers sacking you because of your sexuality, your beliefs, or the colour of your skin. They guarantee you a fair trial if you’re accused of something. Without them, the state and big business can do what they like, and you’ll have no recourse.

So let’s be honest, if you still want to abolish human rights, then tell us plainly, what specific human rights would you like us to get rid of?

Once you strip back the headlines, the truth is ugly. Reform UK and their hard-right allies aren’t just talking about asylum seekers, they’re talking about you and your family. They're talking about dismantling the very framework that protects us all. Today it’s migrants. Tomorrow it’s trade unionists, journalists, campaigners, or anyone who dares to stand up to them. That’s how this game is played: chip away at human rights for the 'undeserving' then extend it to everyone else.

And don’t think this is theoretical. History is full of examples of governments who started by tearing rights away from one group before turning their sights on the rest of society. The ECHR was drafted in the aftermath of the Second World War and championed by Winston Churchill precisely to stop those abuses happening again.

To leave it now, at the urging of a bunch of snake oil salesmen like Reform UK Ltd, would be to give politicians the power to decide what freedoms you can and cannot enjoy without recourse to the courts and with impunity.

Ask yourself this: do you trust Nigel Farage, Richard Tice, or indeed any politician, Reform UK Ltd, Tory or otherwise, with the authority to rewrite your most basic protections? Because I for one don’t.

And if you think that sounds like paranoia, just look at what’s already happening under the current government while we’re still inside the ECHR.

Take the proscription of Palestine Action. This is a group of direct-action activists who have broken into weapons factories, occupied offices, and yes, even vandalised a military plane used in supplying Israel’s assault on Gaza. You can agree or disagree with their methods, but what they are not is a terrorist organisation. They have not launched a campaign of violence against civilians. Their targets are property and supply lines directly linked to what the International Court of Justice has already said may amount to genocide. Yet the government has labelled them as terrorists, putting them in the same category as ISIS or al-Qaeda. That is state overreach of the highest order, criminalising protest, not terrorism.

And thanks to our current Government, don't think it is beyond the bounds of possibility that a Reform UK Ltd Government, that has pledged to bring back capital punishment for Terrorism, won't hag peaceful protesters as terrorists. The EHCR is the mechanism that would stop that.

And here’s the key point: this was done while Britain is still bound by the ECHR, which is supposed to protect the right to free assembly, free speech, and the right to protest. Yet those protections are already being stretched to breaking point by a government desperate to silence dissent. If they can do this under the constraints of the ECHR, imagine what they’ll do once those constraints are gone. Palestine Action today, climate activists tomorrow, trade unionists the day after. The slope isn’t just slippery, we’re already halfway down it.

This is why the Farages and Tices of this world want Britain out of the ECHR. Not because it ties our hands on immigration, but because it ties their hands when it comes to crushing resistance, silencing campaigners, and rewriting the rules in favour of the powerful. The ECHR is not some abstract foreign imposition. It is the last line of defence between ordinary people and the authoritarian instincts of governments who think rights are a privilege, not a guarantee.

So the question isn’t whether Reform UK want to leave the ECHR, of course they do. The real question is whether you are willing to hand politicians the unchecked power to strip away your rights as easily as they have already stripped away the rights of others. If you cheered when Palestine Action are branded terrorists, don’t be surprised when your own protest, your own strike, or your own speech is next in line. That’s the logic of repression. And once those protections are gone, good luck getting them back.

The ECHR isn’t perfect. No system is. But without it, you and I are left at the mercy of governments that have already shown time and again how little they care for ordinary people. So next time someone tells you we should walk away from human rights, don’t just nod along. Ask them straight: which rights are you happy to give up? And watch them squirm.

_Sources

Reform UK, Our Contract with You (Immigration & Constitutional Reform pages). Reform Contract
House of Commons Library: The ECHR & HRA 1998 (devolution/GFA/TCA interactions). House of Commons Library
EPRS brief on the TCA (ECHR conditionality & fast-track termination). European Parliament
GFA text (ECHR incorporation in NI). GOV.UK
ECHR Article 58 six-month exit: Institute for Government explainer. Institute for Government
Case law touchstones: Chahal (Art.3, non-refoulement); Gillan & Quinton (stop & search/Art.8); S & Marper (DNA retention/Art.8); Big Brother Watch (bulk surveillance/Arts.8,10); Wilson & Palmer (trade union rights/Art.11); Stec (pensions as “possessions”/A1P1). TUC

A bit of shameless self-plugging here. This is www.TetleysTLDR.com blog. It's not monetised. Please feel free to go and look at the previous blogs on the website and if you like them, please feel free to share them.