Does human rights law really stop the UK controlling migration? No – and Keir Starmer knows that | Jamie Burton

Here is a recent quote from the source of the Downing Street.

The assistant was discussing European Convention on Human Rights (Echr), the post -war treaty to protect people’s freedoms in Europe, which was believed by the United Kingdom in 1951. Although it was also essential for the entire Kiir Starmer profession before political, his government is looking to reduce some of the main provisions.

Evit Cooper, Minister of the Interior, announced A review of “the application of the Human Rights Law … to ensure that the immigration and asylum system works effectively “so” there is a suitable feeling of controlling the system. “It is expected that there will be a white sheet later this year.

It does not require a political genius to work Nigel Faraj And the Reform Party in the United Kingdom. Farage was adept at mixing the deportation of foreign criminals with asylum seekers who reached small boats, in fact they were completely separate. By claiming that Echr prevents foreign criminals from deporting, it appears to have succeeded in making human rights a problem for the government.

This is where the real danger lies in the work, because the perceived need – or the saying – has led many politicians to do the wrong thing.

It is worth spending time in understanding how the law works and why the work is dealt with “the problem” now, if not exaggerated, exaggeratedly and badly. The current rules of the Ministry of Interior require a deportation order against any foreign criminal who is serving a 12 -month prison sentence. Only “exceptionally” can avoid automatic deportation if it will come out of the European Human Rights Convention, which means in practice the usually the right to family life contained in Article 8.

The number of people who are able to summon this protection is relatively small. Most appeals fail, and among those who succeed, about one of every three are successful on the basis of human rights. In the 13 years between 2008 and 2021, the last period was available, and this was A total of 2,400 such as among 21,500 calls.

But even some of these failed calls are used in an unlimited way by the media and politicians to demand that the system is exploited. There was a widespread condition for a man who resists deportation on the basis that his son Foreign chicken nuggets are unequal. But in court, the judge described this argument as not getting “anywhere near the level” required to resist the deportation.

In fact, Parliament has already placed a high tape in this field. No person should be a 8 -resuming article in the United Kingdom for most of his life, but rather must be so social and culturally integrated that there will be “very big obstacles” in front of living in the recipient country. Even if they have a child or partner in the UK with a British sexual mission or live here for at least seven years, they still have to show that it will be “harsh” either the child or partner is separated from them. Individuals who have received a prison sentence for more than four years should appear that there are “very convincing conditions” as well as other standards. Cases that usually succeed include a person born in the United Kingdom, or came as a child, or has a family member who has deep needs so that separation has severe consequences.

Some reports He suggested that Denmark was able to achieve a more restricted system While it remains inside the tram lines that Echr setBut this is not true. Although Denmark tried to restrict the scope of the balance between different rights, it failed to protect the final discretionary authority of the courts to prevent deportation in exceptional cases after it was banned by the final ruling of Echr, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Three years ago, In a case called savranA decision was ruling from the Danish courts illegally because it gave a small study of how to integrate a mentally ill request in Denmark since his arrival as a child.

The European Court has been clearly strong in defending the right of the countries that participated in the European Convention on Human Rights to reach its own rulings regarding balance in terms of family life, as long as the basic principles of human rights are not violated. And in Britain, even the independent review of Human Rights Law Conservatives did not find any evidence that our courts were overcoming this field.

The result is that unless this work government wants to exclude any kind of budget and remove the discretionary power of the courts, it will not be possible to make any noticeable reduction to a small number of people who are able to rely on Article 8.

To be clear: even if Article 8 has been completely removed, it will not make a big difference in immigration figures in general, which largely reflects the government’s view of the country’s economic needs. This will not affect those who reach small boats, the vast majority of them have no other way to apply to asylum in the UK.

Therefore, we have left the government trying to link the needle between reducing the numbers of human rights appeals against deportation and survival in line with the European Human Rights Convention. If the government argues that Article 8 is exploited, it will be both to recognize a “problem” that does not exist and refuses to do the only thing that is able to address it. This will not support support between any group of voters, whether they are peeling for reform or the largest numbers now According to the support, the support Liberal Democrats and Greens.

Work does not offer much control of immigration but narration on human rights – one person knows the prime minister better than anyone. One hopes to adhere to what he always believed, and continues to present the positive issue that human rights are an integral part of an emotional and comprehensive society.

• Jimmy Burton, a lawyer in Dugti Street Chambers. Finnian Clarke, also a lawyer on Daghty Street Street, participated in his authorship

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you want to provide a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered to be published in our Messages Please section Click here.