“The UK should follow the EU’s lead and decline being a member of the ECHR”

Oh? You didn’t know the EU has consistently refused to become a member of the ECHR?

Montage © Facts4EU.Org 2025

Brexit Facts4EU on the hypocrisy of the EU and the solution to the state of emergency on our south coast

On Wednesday at Prime Minister’s Questions, Reform UK’s newest MP, Sarah Pochin, proposed to Sir Keir that the United Kingdom should follow the lead of EU countries such as France, Denmark, and others, and ban the burka.

Today, Brexit Facts4EU extends this into a far more profound demand of Sir Keir Starmer. At the end of this short series of reports, any rational person will conclude that the United Kingdom must, with regret, follow the lead of the European Union as a body and decline to be a Member of the ECHR. We will provide readers with the official facts which will prove this conclusion beyond doubt.

The EU is not, and never has been, a Party to the European Convention on Human Rights and is not, and never has been, a Member of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

It has been prevented from joining by a ruling of its own European Court of Justice.

And yet it insists that the UK and all member states must be a member of the ECHR.

D-Day

This day, 06 June 2025, marks 81 years since the first major crossing of the English Channel of hundreds of thousands of British, American, and Commonwealth troops to liberate continental Europe including what are now all the 27 countries of the European Union. The decision to do this took courage and determination, and an acceptance that very regrettable losses would be inevitable. It was based on the best intelligence available and a clear mandate that Europe must be liberated from the control of the tyrannical German regime.

In this first of these reports, backed as always with detailed research of official documents, statements, and data, Brexit Facts4EU in association with CIBUK will provide the irrefutable evidence required to deliver a different mandate from the people to its government. We will also be working in association with GB News who will exclusively reveal our findings and report these impartially to their readers and viewers.

Facts4EU will then go on to propose a solution to the undeclared state of emergency which now exists on the southern borders of the Kingdom.

Background summary

Discussions started 50 years ago in the early 1970s between the Council of Europe and what was then the European Economic Community regarding the Convention on Human Rights which came into force in 1953. The court – the ECHR - followed six years later in 1959. Negotiations have continued over the years, as the EU has evolved and new Treaties have been drafted and ratified. Still the EU decided it was unable to sign up to the Convention and could not be a Member of the ECHR.

Brexit Facts4EU.Org Summary of positions of the EU and the Council of Europe

1. What does the EU say?

After years of stop-start negotiations, the latest round began in 2020. On the occasion of the 70th anniversary of the discussions to form the Convention in 1950, the EU issued yet another of its flamboyant announcements.

“The EU shares the Convention’s vision for the protection of human rights across the continent, and remains committed to acceding to the Convention.”
- From ‘The ECHR at 70: Celebrating the EU and Council of Europe’s Shared Vision for Human Rights’, 2020

Buried in this announcement was the sentence:

“The anniversary thus comes at a very pertinent moment, as accession negotiations resumed on 29 September 2020.”

These negotiations are continuing, but the EU has still not signed the Convention and is still not a Member of its court, the ECHR.

2. What does the Council of Europe say?

EU accession to the ECHR ("46+1" Group)

In its latest pronouncement on “EU accession to the ECHR ("46+1" Group)”, the Council of Europe says:

“Accession of the European Union to the European Convention on Human Rights is a long-standing priority for the Council of Europe and a legal obligation for the EU.”

And they end with:

“On 18 December 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered its Opinion 2/13, concluding that the agreement on the accession of the European Union to the European Convention on Human Rights is not compatible with Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union or with Protocol (No 8) relating to Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union on the accession of the Union to the European Convention on Human Rights.”

This position is unchanged.

The European Court of Human Rights – some basic facts

The EU insists the UK submits to the rulings of the ECHR
This is contained in the UK-EU Trade & Cooperation Agreement
However the EU refuses to submit itself
It is not possible to bring any legal case against the EU at the ECHR
It is, however, possible to bring a legal case against the UK

Our fightback is well and truly underway, but we need your help badly
Please don't leave it to someone else - you ARE that someone else

Any credit card user

Quick One-off

From £5 - £1,000

Monthly

From £3 per month

Paypal Users Only - Choose amount first

Quick One-off

Monthly

To reiterate, the EU insists the UK submits to the ECHR but won’t submit itself

“At present, all 46 Council of Europe member states, including the 27 EU Member States, are already parties to the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the EU itself is not. This means that actions of the EU’s institutions, agencies and other bodies cannot currently be challenged at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.”
- European External Action Service (EU Commission), 18 Oct 2021

This remains the case today.

Does the UK’s Supreme Court have to obey the ECHR? Yes, says the Court

It has been suggested by some commentators that the UK does not have to obey the rulings of the ECHR, but merely to treat them as ‘advisory’. Below is what the ECHR has to say about this.

“[The Court’s] judgments are binding on the countries concerned and have led governments to alter their legislation and administrative practice in a wide range of areas.”
- ECHR document, accessed 06 June 2025

So, according to the court itself the rulings are indeed binding.

3. The European Court of Human Rights – the grandeur

ECHR is based in a grandiose suite of buildings in Strasbourg, France – purpose-built
The whole thing cost a fortune, with over 300,000 sq ft of floor space
Courtroom alone covers over 9,250 sq ft
Context: This main courtroom is so large it would be possible to fit 12 average-sized UK properties in it

[Sources: ECHR | EU Commission]

Maybe it's worth repeating...

The EU is not, and never has been, a Party to the European Convention on Human Rights and is not, and never has been, a Member of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

It has been prevented from joining by a ruling of its own European Court of Justice.

And yet it insists that the UK and all member states must be a member of the ECHR.

Observations

In this short series, we intend to provide the irrefutable evidence required to mandate the government to leave the dysfunctional body that is the ECHR.

As with many issues confronting the country right now, it seems that we must be more emphatic. The country’s newly-won sovereignty (even if not completed) is under very clear threat.

In our next report on the ECHR we will provide some facts and figures, together with our famous ‘at-a-glance’ charts, which will further demonstrate the inevitability of a decision by the United Kingdom to resile from membership of this foreign court.

Please, please help us to carry on our vital work in defence of independence, sovereignty, democracy and freedom by donating today. Thank you.

[ Sources: Council of Europe | EU Commission | EEAS | ECHR ] Politicians and journalists can contact us for details, as ever.

Brexit Facts4EU.Org, Fri 06 June 2025

Click here to go to our news headlines

Please scroll down to COMMENT on the above article.
And don't forget actually to post your message after you have previewed it!

Something to say about this? Scroll down for reader comments

Since before the EU Referendum, Brexit Facts4EU.Org
has been the most prolific researcher and publisher of Brexit facts in the world.

Supported by MPs, MEPs, & other groups, our work has impact.

We think facts matter. Please donate today, so that we can continue to ensure a clean Brexit is finally delivered.

Any credit card user

Quick One-off

From £5 - £1,000

Monthly

From £3 per month

Paypal Users Only - Choose amount first

Quick One-off

Monthly

PLEASE NOTE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT : You can write your comment under any existing comments below. After you have clicked to preview your comment, you MUST then click on the CAPTCHA system and send you comment, for it to be published. Thank you!

Reader Comments 50

1. Sparky , Friday, June 06, 2025, 06:57:

The EHCR is part Council of Europe which the UK is still a member of. In May 24 The Northern Ireland Affairs Committee took evidence on the potential impact of ECHR withdrawal on NI. It concluded “The UK government would knowingly be in breach of the Good Friday Agreement if it withdrew from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)”. It’s NI that will keep the UK tied to the EU and is still the unresolved Brexit issue that will probably only be resolved with Unification of Ireland.

2. Old Albion , Friday, June 06, 2025, 06:57:

The chance of Starmer leaving the ECHR is somewhat remote. In fact it won't happen. A completely new government would be needed for that to happen. A government that is not the Uniparty, Green or Lib Dem.

3. Have You Wondered , Friday, June 06, 2025, 07:06:

.
We talk about the ECHR and how it seemingly runs contra to its original intention, particularly in relation to migrant invasion issue. However:
.
All this could be resolved using the legislation itself !
.
Why oh why is the Govt. not debating that the UK (and European) predicament with the ECHR could be resolved from within the convention itself (article 15) along with 1951 Refugee Convention article 9? Derogation in times of Emergency.
.
Maybe with the very real threat to national security, the amount of parliamentary time, political upheaval, economic concern, housing, crime, personal safety, social unrest and concern about an overall threatening cultural change in the UK, that the immigration issue comes within Article 15.
.
ECHR ARTICLE 15
Derogation in time of emergency
1. In time of war or other public emergency threatening the
life of the nation any High Contracting Party may take measures
derogating from its obligations under this Convention to the extent
strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that
such measures are not inconsistent with its other obligations under
international law.
.
1951 Refugee Convention article 9 "...in the interest of essential national security"
.
No rush - talks only began 35yrs ago in 1991 with the Sangatte Protocol (1991)
.

4. Have You Wondered , Friday, June 06, 2025, 07:11:

.
Since we're discussing legislation that the EU are not abiding by - read this:
.
How about France and the EU abiding by existing legislation?
.
"European Union Legal Obligations to Detain Unsafe migrant Craft"
.
7 Pieces of legislation being contravened. Why have the EU and UK not vigorously fought in the International Courts and maybe kick the ICC into action regarding the apparent illegal loss of lives of migrants a sea ?
Take a look at the legal regulations precis below and suggest:
1. Why the EU and the French in particular are not abiding by 7 pieces of International and domestic law?
2. Why the ECHR are not upholding their own conventions.
3. Why Westminster is not vigorously fighting in the International Courts and maybe kick the ICC into action regarding the apparent illegal loss of lives of migrants a sea ?
4. Why the authors of these legislative processes are not highlighting and contesting the relevant parties?
.
It beggars belief that with so much legislation, all parties are emasculated - WHY? (or who?)
.
To follow is a precis of the regulations.
.

5. Have You Wondered , Friday, June 06, 2025, 07:15:

.
Precis:
.
European Convention on Human Rights:
Article 2 (Right to Life): The ECHR obliges EU member states to protect the right to life, which includes taking proactive measures to prevent loss of life at sea.
.
Port State Control Directive (2009/16/EC):
While the PSC Directive primarily targets commercial vessels, the principles of ensuring maritime safety extend to any vessel within EU waters, including those carrying migrants.
.
Directive 2013/32/EU on Common Procedures for Granting and Withdrawing International Protection:
The directive obliges member states to ensure that migrants are treated humanely, which includes detaining unsafe vessels to prevent loss of life at sea.
.
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS):
Article 94: Imposes a duty on flag states to ensure that ships flying their flag are seaworthy. In the absence of a flag state (common with migrant craft), coastal states like those in the EU have a responsibility to ensure safety within their territorial waters, including detaining unsafe vessels.
.
International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS):
EU member states have an obligation to prevent unseaworthy vessels, including migrant craft, from departing ports or continuing voyages if they pose a risk to life.
.
International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR):
Detaining unsafe migrant vessels is a preventive measure that aligns with these obligations by ensuring that vessels that pose a risk do not proceed to sea.
.
Frontex.
Frontex has the authority to detain vessels that are found to be unseaworthy, preventing them from embarking on or continuing dangerous voyages.
.
Why no action from any Nation or legislative body?
.

6. Sparky , Friday, June 06, 2025, 07:24:

3 HYW. We should be extremely careful with the EHCR and not forget the background of its creation which was driven partly by Winston Churchill.
.
There maybe should be a review of the Articles, but being outside the EU has made it more challenging for the UK to do so.
.
Re Article 15, there is another paragraph in this Article which states: No derogation from Article 2, except in respect of deaths resulting from lawful acts of war, or from Articles 3, 4 (paragraph 1) and 7 shall be made under this provision.

7. Sparky , Friday, June 06, 2025, 07:29:

5 HYW. Good points but the inflatables and gangs being used are outside and breaking the law. Stop the boats from getting into Europe in the first place and work with other EU Nations to break the illegal gangs. That means working with the EU but we’ve left!

8. Have You Wondered , Friday, June 06, 2025, 07:49:

.
7. Sparky - " That means working with the EU but we’ve left!"
.
Working with them didn't work when we were in the EU.
.
Example: Dublin Agreement.
.
There are those that say "yeah but as a result of Brexit, since Jan 2020 we can no longer send migrants back to EU states under the Dublin agreement", (which is true).
.
But they should reflect on the fact that in the 5 years to 2019 the UK transferred 1,660 migrants to other EU states.
..
However, over the same period EU states transferred 3,074 migrants back to the UK.
.
France, by comparison transferred out 13657 migrants, but took back in 9339, so whilst they benefited from being part of Dublin, we didn’t.
.

9. Have You Wondered , Friday, June 06, 2025, 08:01:

.
6. Sparky. "Re Article 15, there is another paragraph in this Article which states: No derogation from Article 2, except in respect of deaths resulting from lawful acts of war, or from Articles 3, 4 (paragraph 1) and 7 shall be made under this provision."
.
As I said "Maybe with the very real threat to national security, the amount of parliamentary time, political upheaval, economic concern, housing, crime, personal safety, social unrest and concern about an overall threatening cultural change in the UK, that the immigration issue comes within Article 15."
.
Which is covered by :
.
The landmark case Lawless v. Ireland (1961) first articulated the key elements. Later refined in The Greek Case (1968) and A. and Others v. United Kingdom (2009), the Court laid out four essential criteria:
.
A “public emergency threatening the life of the nation” under Article 15 ECHR must be:
Real and immediate,
Threatening the whole nation,
Endangering the basic functioning of society,
So serious that normal legal tools aren't enough.
Derogations must also be strictly necessary, proportional, and not conflict with non-derogable rights.
.

10. Sparky , Friday, June 06, 2025, 08:09:

8 HYW. Then that is the fault of our own Govt. The one we chose to believe when Johnson said “take back control”
,
9. The points in your last paragraph may be a route but it would be tenuous at best for this to be argued. How are people getting in boats “threatening the life of the nation”?

50 comments, page 1 of 5

Add comment:

Please note: Your email address is never published unless you choose to enter it.