Latest news with #EuropeanConventiononHumanRights
Gulf Today
a day ago
- Politics
- Gulf Today
Britain must be ready to reform international agreements
Something extraordinary has just happened. In March, Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, said that she was reviewing the way the European Convention on Human Rights was being interpreted by the courts. Three months later, no one will defend the convention as it is. Two more MPs joined the stampede to change it today: Jake Richards and Dan Tomlinson, two ambitious Labour backbenchers, have a joint article in The Times calling for "reform" of the convention. It became clear that this was not just a matter of tactical positioning in British politics when nine EU leaders, led by the prime ministers of Italy and Denmark, published an open letter on 22 May to launch an 'open-minded conversation" about the "interpretation" of the convention. They said: 'We have seen, for example, cases concerning the expulsion of criminal foreign nationals where the interpretation of the convention has resulted in the protection of the wrong people and posed too many limitations on the states' ability to decide whom to expel from their territories." A week later, Richard Hermer, the UK attorney general, delivered a lecture that attracted attention for suggesting that Kemi Badenoch's wish to "disengage" from the European court was like legal arguments made in Nazi Germany to "put aside" international law. He had to apologise for that "clumsy" analogy, which meant that hardly anyone noticed something else he said in the lecture, namely that Britain must be ready to "reform" international agreements such as the convention so that they retain "democratic legitimacy". A few days later, Alain Berset, the secretary general of the Council of Europe, the body that oversees the convention and its court, and which as every Brexit pedant knows is separate from the European Union, said: "We need adaptation. We need discussion about the rules that we want to have, and there is no taboo." In just a few weeks, the debate has moved from "how the convention is interpreted" to "rewriting the convention itself". Something is happening. It is almost as if European leaders have learned from their failure to give David Cameron reforms that would have enabled him to win the referendum and keep Britain in the EU. They have realised that they need to change the ECHR in order to save it. The transformation of the politics of the issue in the UK was confirmed last week, when Ed Davey said that he wouldn't be opposed to rewriting the convention. "If you could do it collectively, working with the court, with European colleagues, yes, one could look at that," he said. That is Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats, who fought a general election on a promise to cancel Brexit; the party that most venerates European institutions and international law. What is going on? Nigel Farage claims that he has changed the terms of the debate: that the liberal establishment is panicking because of his campaign against the ECHR. First, he forced Kemi Badenoch to harden her line, inherited from Rishi Sunak, of being prepared to repudiate the ECHR if necessary; now the government is trying to hold back the tide by reviewing the way the convention is interpreted or even amending it. This is not the whole story. I don't think Giorgia Meloni and Mette Frederiksen were prompted to publish their open letter by Reform's success in British opinion polls. They were responding to a genuine problem that has frustrated elected leaders for a long time. I remember Tony Blair being as irritated as his first-class temperament would allow at the Chahal decision of 1996 that made it hard for him to deport various criminals and terrorists. But the way the convention, especially article 8, the right to family life, has been interpreted, both by the European Court of Human Rights and by national courts, has become more of a problem in recent years. In Britain, the Telegraph has given the appearance of campaigning against human rights law by simply reporting a series of rulings by immigration tribunals. (Perhaps the most eye-catching use of the ECHR in recent months was the Albanian criminal whose deportation was halted partly because of his young son's aversion to foreign chicken nuggets.)
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Hindustan Times
Sovereign assurance given in UK extradition case
Two months after a UK trial court refused to extradite two fugitives - Virkaran Awasty and his wife Ritika Awasty -- citing the Sanjay Bhandari case and stating that they could be at risk of torture by investigators , India gave a sovereign guarantee that if extradited, Awastys 'won't be interrogated', highly placed officials familiar with the development said. The assurance might give some relief to the prosecutors in London in India's appeal in the UK high court against the Awastys' discharge, the second such jolt faced by Indian investigators this year (the first being the Sanjay Bhandari case in February). The Awastys and their firm Bush Foods are accused of committing a ₹750 crore fraud. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) filed a charge sheet against them in November 2020. The economic offences wings of Delhi and Uttar Pradesh police are also investigating them. They were arrested in London in October 2019 after which extradition proceedings were initiated. On February 28 t, a King's bench division at the UK high court allowed Bhandari's plea against his extradition to India, primarily on the ground that he would be at real risk of extortion, torture or violence in Tihar jail, from other prisoners or prison officials. The high court also refused India permission to go to the Supreme Court against the discharge order, which means that Bhandari is now a free man in the UK. Weeks later, on April 11, chief magistrate Paul Goldspring at Westminster Magistrate's court discharged the Awastys on unconditional bail. The court referred to the Bhandari ruling in its order stating that 'in the absence of assurances that Awasty won't be held in Tihar, or if he is, that the issues raised in Bhandari will not apply to him, the real risk remains'. Immediately after the judgement, the crown prosecution service (CPS), which is fighting these extradition cases on India's behalf, wrote to officials n Delhi advising them to provide a sovereign guarantee saying the accused will not be tortured or interrogated and that India will comply with article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) prohibiting torture or inhuman treatment of prisoners. 'To persuade the courts in the UK, we have recently given a sovereign assurance that the Awastys won't face post-extradition interrogation (which means they won't be removed from the prison for questioning) or torture, if extradited to India,' said a senior officer, who asked not to be named. The Sanjay Bhandari judgement has caused significant harm to India's extradition campaign against several high-profile economic offenders with almost all the accused persons located abroad -- including Nirav Modi, Mehul Choksi, and others -- now citing it to seek relief. Indian agencies won a small reprieve last month when the UK high court rejected Nirav Modi's plea for bail . In his order in May third week, judge Michael Fordham rejected Modi's plea that cited the Bhandari judgement saying , 'I am not able to place significant weight on this feature' while adding that unlike Modi's plea (for bail), Bhandari's was a case of prospective post-extradition police interrogation'. Indian agencies recently managed to track fugitive Mehul Choksi in Antwerp and got him arrested in April as part of an extradition request. He has already spent over two months in a prison there and will continue to stay in jail till September 19, the next date of hearing. HT reached out but did not get a comment from MEA till the time of going to print.
Rhyl Journal
2 days ago
- Politics
- Rhyl Journal
ECHR must be reformed to restore ‘fraying' public confidence
Shabana Mahmood told the Council of Europe in a speech in Strasbourg the ECHR 'must evolve' to respond to new realities. It comes as the Government also seeks to tighten the interpretation of the human rights laws in the UK. On Wednesday, the Lord Chancellor said: 'Across Europe, public confidence in the rule of law is fraying 'There is a growing perception – sometimes mistaken, sometimes grounded in reality – that human rights are no longer a shield for the vulnerable, but a tool for criminals to avoid responsibility. 'That the law too often protects those who break the rules, rather than those who follow them.' 'This tension is not new. But in today's world, the threats to justice and liberty are more complex. They can come from technology, transnational crime, uncontrolled migration, or legal systems that drift away from public consent.' Ms Mahmood told European ambassadors the UK was committed to the ECHR, but that was 'not the same as complacency'. She added that when the application of rights 'begins to feel out of step with common sense', that is where trust begins to erode. Her call for change comes as the Government plans to tighten the use of Article 8 of the ECHR, the right to private and family life, in immigration cases in the UK. This includes cases involving foreign criminals. Under the plans unveiled in the immigration White Paper last month, the Home Office will bring forward legislation to try to reduce the number of people claiming 'exceptional circumstances' under Article 8 to stay in the UK. Ms Mahmood said: 'The right to family life is fundamental. But it has too often been used in ways that frustrate deportation, even where there are serious concerns about credibility, fairness, and risk to the public. 'We're bringing clarity back to the distinction between what the law protects and what policy permits.' She also said judges cannot be asked to solve political problems and so reform must be a 'shared political endeavour' among member states. The Lord Chancellor added: 'The European Convention on Human Rights is one of the great achievements of post-war politics. It has endured because it has evolved. Now, it must do so again.' Following Ms Mahmood's speech, a No 10 spokesman said it should be for Parliament and the Government to decide who has the right to remain in the country. 'We want to ensure the right balance is made in migration cases in relation to the national interest,' the spokesman said. The Lord Chancellor was making a broader point that 'now is the time for countries to work together to ensure the ECHR can evolve to meet the challenges facing modern democracies'. But, he added: 'The Government has been clear that Britain will remain a member of the ECHR, it underpins key international agreements on trade, security, on migration, on the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement.' A Tory spokesman said Kemi Badenoch had been clear that 'we would do whatever is necessary to ensure the supremacy of UK laws, and set a number of clear tests, including the deportation test, and made clear that if necessary, we would leave the ECHR'. But responding to the speech Sacha Deshmukh, chief executive of Amnesty International UK, said that any reform of the ECHR must 'shore up universal protections, not chip away at them'. He said: 'If the UK starts picking and choosing who merits protection from torture, family separation or arbitrary removal, it will undermine not just its moral authority but the rule of law itself, weakening its hand when speaking out against rights abuses abroad.'
The Star
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Star
Britain, under pressure on immigration, urges reform of European human rights framework
FILE PHOTO: A general view of Union Jack flags and the Houses of Parliament in London, Britain, April 12, 2025. REUTERS/Carlos Jasso/ File Photo LONDON (Reuters) -Britain called on Wednesday for reform of the European Convention on Human Rights, amid growing domestic criticism that it allows a foreign-based court to meddle in sensitive areas of policy such as immigration and deportation rulings. The convention, which dates back more than 70 years and aims to protect human rights and political freedoms in Europe, must "evolve" to reflect changing political realities, justice minister Shabana Mahmood said. Britain's Labour government has criticised the way the convention is interpreted in immigration cases, where its provisions have been used to try to prevent the deportation of migrants - some of whom have been convicted of serious crimes. "It damages the public perception of human rights altogether," Mahmood told a meeting of the Committee of Ministers, the decision-making arm of the Council of Europe, which oversees implementation of the convention. The convention applies to the 46 member states of the Council of Europe and can be enforced by binding rulings from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), based in the French city of Strasbourg. While Britain has left the European Union, it remains a member of the Council of Europe and of the ECHR. Labour has already promised to clarify how the convention should be interpreted by domestic judges, but Mahmood used her speech to urge wider reform of the human rights framework. "The European Convention on Human Rights is one of the great achievements of post-war politics. It has endured because it has evolved. Now, it must do so again," she said. The Council of Europe did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Mahmood's remarks. OTHERS ALSO SEEKING REFORM Britain is not alone in seeking reform. Nine European countries, spearheaded by Italy and Denmark, urged the Council last month to ease the process of expelling foreign criminals. Secretary General Alain Berset, the head of the Council, criticised that initiative, saying on May 24: "The court must not be weaponised — neither against governments, nor by them." Britain's nearly one-year-old Labour government has seen its popularity slide partly due to public concerns over immigration and needs to show it can deport foreign criminals and migrants who have arrived illegally. Labour is committed to remaining in the convention but Nigel Farage's Reform UK, a right-wing party now topping national opinion polls, has said it would immediately withdraw if it won power. The Conservative Party, the biggest opposition party in parliament, has said it is reviewing its policy on Britain's continued membership. (Reporting by Sam TabahritiEditing by William James and Gareth Jones)
Straits Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- Straits Times
Britain, under pressure on immigration, urges reform of European human rights framework
FILE PHOTO: A general view of Union Jack flags and the Houses of Parliament in London, Britain, April 12, 2025. REUTERS/Carlos Jasso/ File Photo LONDON - Britain called on Wednesday for reform of the European Convention on Human Rights, amid growing domestic criticism that it allows a foreign-based court to meddle in sensitive areas of policy such as immigration and deportation rulings. The convention, which dates back more than 70 years and aims to protect human rights and political freedoms in Europe, must "evolve" to reflect changing political realities, justice minister Shabana Mahmood said. Britain's Labour government has criticised the way the convention is interpreted in immigration cases, where its provisions have been used to try to prevent the deportation of migrants - some of whom have been convicted of serious crimes. "It damages the public perception of human rights altogether," Mahmood told a meeting of the Committee of Ministers, the decision-making arm of the Council of Europe, which oversees implementation of the convention. The convention applies to the 46 member states of the Council of Europe and can be enforced by binding rulings from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), based in the French city of Strasbourg. While Britain has left the European Union, it remains a member of the Council of Europe and of the ECHR. Labour has already promised to clarify how the convention should be interpreted by domestic judges, but Mahmood used her speech to urge wider reform of the human rights framework. "The European Convention on Human Rights is one of the great achievements of post-war politics. It has endured because it has evolved. Now, it must do so again," she said. The Council of Europe did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Mahmood's remarks. OTHERS ALSO SEEKING REFORM Britain is not alone in seeking reform. Nine European countries, spearheaded by Italy and Denmark, urged the Council last month to ease the process of expelling foreign criminals. Secretary General Alain Berset, the head of the Council, criticised that initiative, saying on May 24: "The court must not be weaponised — neither against governments, nor by them." Britain's nearly one-year-old Labour government has seen its popularity slide partly due to public concerns over immigration and needs to show it can deport foreign criminals and migrants who have arrived illegally. Labour is committed to remaining in the convention but Nigel Farage's Reform UK, a right-wing party now topping national opinion polls, has said it would immediately withdraw if it won power. The Conservative Party, the biggest opposition party in parliament, has said it is reviewing its policy on Britain's continued membership. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
