What does UK want to change about human rights law – and will it happen?

 

 Explainer

What does UK want to change about human rights law – and will it happen?

 

Ministers in Strasbourg have been discussing the European Convention on Human Rights and how it affects migration

 

Rajeev Syal Home affairs editor

Wed 10 Dec 2025 18.36 CET

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/dec/10/what-does-uk-want-to-change-about-human-rights-law-and-will-it-happen

 

Why does the British government want to make changes to the way the European Convention on Human Rights is interpreted by judges?

 

Keir Starmer has said the government must change the way human rights laws are implemented to make it easier to deport unauthorised immigrants.

 

He argued in an article for the Guardian that urgent changes to the convention’s application were needed to defeat “the forces of hate and division” he says are growing across Europe.

 

Why did the UK send two ministers – the deputy prime minister, David Lammy, and the attorney general, Lord Hermer – to Strasbourg to do it?

They were attending an informal meeting of the Council of Europe alongside representatives of 45 other countries. They discussed the convention and how it affects migration.

 

Signed in 1950 by the Council of Europe, the convention is an international treaty designed to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms in Europe. All 46 countries that comprise the Council of Europe are party to the convention, including the 27 EU member states.

 

Any person whose rights have been violated under the convention by a state party may bring an action before the European court of human rights.

 

The council oversees the convention and can therefore make a declaration on how it is implemented.

 

How did the meeting go?

There was an obvious split. Twenty seven countries including the UK signed a statement identifying which articles of the convention they believe need to be changed to stop them from being used to halt removals.

 

Draft conclusions signed off by all 46 members promised further discussions on possible changes to be decided at a meeting in May in Moldova.

 

Which parts of the ECHR were the 27 countries concerned about?

The talks in Strasbourg have covered issues including smuggling gangs and how to create human rights-compliant “returns hubs” – centres in third-party countries where asylum seekers could be forcibly housed if they cannot be returned to dangerous countries.

 

They also covered the complex rules of article 8, the right to family life, and article 3, the ban on inhumane treatment and torture, which feature in many asylum and immigration cases.

 

Are many migration cases being heard before the European court of human rights?

Experts have pointed out that 420,000 people who believe their human rights were violated made applications under the convention over the past decade. Around 7,000 of those were related to migration. Of those, only 450 resulted in judgments against the country.

 

Will the meeting in May be able to force through the changes wanted by Starmer?

In May, the Council of Europe hopes to make “a declaration” – a political statement reaffirming commitments or guiding principles, carrying significant political weight but not legally binding in itself.

 

Declarations from the council are intended to have an effect on case law and on European court rulings. Previous statements have been taken on board by judges – but they will not be bound by any declaration.

 

However, it may be possible for a two-thirds majority, or 31 members, to force through a “decision” that would give their views of interpretations of articles 3 and 8, sources have said.

 

Between January and February there will be legal and technical discussions between officials from each country, who will prepare the ground for political discussions. Crucially, they will set the ground for the agenda at May’s meeting and will decide whether to address articles 8 and 3, which have been at the centre of immigration rows.

 

Why is this such a crucial issue for Starmer?

The prime minister has come under political pressure from the Conservatives and Reform UK, who are calling for a complete British withdrawal from the treaty.

 

Starmer’s Labour government has rejected that approach, calling instead for changes to how the ECHR works in practice, including how it is interpreted by judges in British courts.

 

Membership of the ECHR has emerged as a key dividing line in debates over small boat crossings in the Channel. Critics of the treaty argue an easier process for returning refused refugees would deter people from making the journey.