What is the ECHR and why does it matter?

What is the ECHR?

The European Convention on Human Rights, sometimes known as the ECHR or the Convention, is an international human rights treaty. It was created in the aftermath of the Second World War to ensure the horrors committed could never happen again.

It was created by the Council of Europe, an international organisation dedicated to upholding human rights and democracy. The United Kingdom is one of 46 member states (countries).

The UK played an important role in the birth of the ECHR. British lawyers were integral to the drafting of the text, and Winston Churchill was a key early advocate. Since we signed the Convention in 1951, and accepted the right of individual petition in the 1960s, it has protected us from things like torture, killing, and slavery and ensures our freedom of speech, assembly, religion, privacy and much more.

How does the ECHR work?

When member states sign up to the ECHR, they commit to protecting the basic rights and freedoms of everyone in their country.

In the UK, the ECHR is brought into our law by the Human Rights Act. This allows us not only to rely on Convention rights in courts, but also ensures that public authorities such as Government departments, local councils, police, schools, certain care providers, and prisons are acting in a way that is compatible with the Convention. Meaning we are protected long before something ever gets to court.

But if the public authorities fail to respect our rights, the ECHR empowers us to seek justice, either through the UK courts or at the European Court of Human Rights.

What is the European Court of Human Rights?

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) was set up in 1959 in Strasbourg, France, to enforce the ECHR. In other words, it makes sure that the rights in the Convention are upheld and protected.

Until the Human Rights Act was passed in 1998, the only way that people in the UK could enforce their rights was to take a case against the Government to the ECtHR. Before 2000, the ECtHR found many human rights violations by the UK Government against UK citizens.

Since the Human Rights Act came into effect in 2000, we can enforce the Convention rights in our UK courts, saving a large amount of time and money. However, for those who have not found justice in the domestic courts, the ECtHR still acts as a critical backstop, making important judgments when the UK courts have got it wrong.

The ECtHR now finds many fewer violations because the HRA allows our own judges to take care of them before it goes that far.

What does the ECHR have to do with the European Union?

Nothing. The ECHR was launched by the Council of Europe. The Council of Europe is older than the European Union and not connected to it.

Confusingly, the Council of Europe is also not the same as the European Council, which is an institution of the European Union.

Nineteen of the 46 member states of the Council of Europe – including the United Kingdom – are not members of the EU.

What have the ECHR and ECtHR ever done for us?

There have been several important cases that have used the ECHR which have protected and advanced human rights in the UK:

• Decriminalising homosexuality in Northern Ireland came about thanks to a case from 1981, where a man argued his right to a private life had been violated by the law.
• It’s brought justice to the families affected by Hillsborough, who used the ECHR to hold police and authorities accountable when they failed to properly investigate the tragedy.
• In 1999, a case called Smith and Grady made clear that banning LGBT+ people from serving in the Armed Forces breaches human rights.
• The ECHR has protected workers’ rights multiple times. It’s stopped us from being denied pay rises for being part of trade unions or being suspended or intimidated out of taking strike action.
• It’s also upheld journalists’ press freedom. In 1979, the Sunday Times used the ECHR when the Government attempted to block the publication of an article.
• It’s brought justice to victims of forced labour and is part of the reason we have the Modern Slavery Act today.

The ECHR is a ‘living instrument’, which means that the rights protected in it will continue to develop and strengthen, and adapt to new challenges not anticipated all those decades ago. For example, a case called Goodwin established the right to change one’s legal gender in the UK. Staying in the ECHR and retaining the HRA means that our human rights protections can also continue to evolve with the times.

You can read more here: Seven stories that prove we need the European Convention on Human Rights

What is happening to the ECHR?

In December 2025, the Council of Europe met and agreed to start a process to agree a ‘political declaration’ on how the ECHR should be applied by courts. 27 member states (including the UK) laid out in a document what they wanted to see. This included limits on how Article 3 (protection from torture) and Article 8 (the right to private and family life) should be applied in immigration and deportation cases.

In May 2026, all Council of Europe states met in Moldova and agreed on a version of the declaration, known as the Chisinau Declaration. While it does not go as far as the statement written by the 27 countries, it will make it easier for governments to deport people, even when there are serious concerns about their safety or family life.

It means that states may now seek to pass legislation that goes further in restricting human rights than they would have felt able to before and deport people into situations where they may be in greater danger than they would have felt possible before.

Does this mean we have left the ECHR?

No. The political declaration has not ripped up the UK’s obligations to the Convention. However, this move risks opening the door to a slow erosion of the rights we all rely on for ourselves, our families and our wider communities.

Have there been previous attempts to leave the ECHR?

After the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) halted the first flight to Rwanda, some politicians raised the possibility of the UK leaving the ECHR.

The previous government also attempted to replace the Human Rights Act with its Rights Removal Bill in 2022, which sought to weaken our rights and make it harder for us to hold power to account.

These reforms have previously been defended in the name of the public interest, yet the Government has not been honest about what people stand to lose.

If we left the ECHR, what would this mean for ordinary people in the UK?

Leaving the ECHR would put everyone’s rights at risk. The ECtHR is a person’s last resort for holding the state to account when it has abused their rights.

Without the protection of the Human Rights Act or the ECHR, the UK Government would have the power to do whatever it wants to individuals’ rights with no threat of consequences.

Leaving the ECHR would also breach the Good Friday Agreement, which requires that the Convention be directly enforceable in Northern Ireland. This would threaten the peace settlement.

What would leaving the ECHR mean for international human rights?

Leaving the ECHR and reneging on our obligations would undermine the UK’s credibility in criticising human rights abuses abroad, whether that is in Ukraine or China.

It would prevent us from being able to influence the way that the ECtHR judges human rights cases.

It would also risk setting a precedent for other countries to violate individuals’ rights or to leave the ECHR, which would be a major backwards step for international human rights.

Would leaving the ECHR solve immigration?

Despite widespread claims, withdrawing from or weakening the ECHR would have no impact on reducing small boat crossings or allowing mass deportations of people without regular immigration status.

The ECHR doesn’t prevent the UK from deporting people in the overwhelming majority of cases. In the last 45 years, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has found against the UK in just 13 deportation cases.

And of over 400,000 applications the ECtHR has received in the past 10 years, less than 2% concern immigration.

Even without the ECHR, the UK remains bound by international law. The UN 1951 Refugee Convention prohibits returning asylum seekers to harm.

Leaving the ECHR would undermine the UK’’s international relationships, making it harder to agree the sorts of agreements states rely on to effect deportations and removals.