The left-globalist Labour Party government in Britain blasted Brexit boss Nigel Farage’s plans to withdraw from the deportation-blocking European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), claiming that it would put the UK on par with autocratic nations like Russia.
Sparking a meltdown among the chattering classes in the legacy media and Westminster political elites, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage vowed that if elected, his government would withdraw from the ECHR and abolish Tony Blair-era human rights laws that codified international agreements into British law to allow for the deportation of hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants.
Announcing his plans, Mr Farage said: “The only way we will stop the boats is by detaining and deporting absolutely anyone who comes by that route. And if we do that, the boats will stop within days because there will be no incentive to pay a trafficker to get into this country. If you come to the UK illegally, you will be detained and deported and never, ever allowed to stay. Period. That is our big message.”
Farage’s migration plans, which also included establishing a deportation command centre to “track down” and remove illegals, were met with shock and horror from the London establishment, including from the left-wing Labour Party government of Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, which has overseen a record setting pace of illegal migrant landings this year.
The government’s housing minister, Matthew Pennycook, said in comments reported by the Times of London: “We don’t think that’s in our national interest. [The ECHR] underpins a series of incredibly important agreements, including the Good Friday agreement.
“We want to reform it in conjunction with European partners, not by withdrawing from it unilaterally or suspending it. That would put us in a club with Russia and Belarus.”
Britain originally signed onto the European Convention on Human Rights in the wake of the Second World War in an attempt to prevent further atrocities and to protect genuine refugees fleeing from conflict in Europe.
However, the ECHR has become increasingly controversial after its associated court in France sensationally intervened in 2022 with a last-minute injunction to prevent a flight of aliens to an asylum processing centre in Rwanda. The move essentially derailed the previous Conservative government’s key deterrence policy against illegals crossing the English Channel in people smuggler-operated boats.
The court was able to do so because, despite the UK leaving the European Union in 2020, the ECHR is technically an independent institution, even though it shares the same anthem, flag, and even same campus as the EU Parliament in Strasbourg. Successive governments of both Westminster establishment parties have refused to withdraw from the agreement, even amid record waves of illegals landings on British shores following Brexit.
The Convention has also faced criticism in Britain over is frequent use by open borders activist attorneys and left-wing judges to block the deportation of illegals and even the worst criminals from the country.
For example, in March, a judge blocked the deportation of a convicted pedophile from Pakistan as he would likely face criminal prosecution in his homeland over his “alcohol consumption”, with the court claiming that it would violate Article 3 of the ECHR, which protects against sending people to countries where they may face “torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the victim’s conduct.”
However, the scope of the justifications used by migrants under the Convention to avoid deportation is much wider. Indeed, earlier this year an illegal migrant criminal from Albania was allowed to remain in Britain after a judge found that because his son did not like to eat foreign chicken nuggets, it would be “unduly harsh” to deport him and would violate Article 8 of the ECHR, which guarantees a “right to private and family life”.
Follow Kurt Zindulka on X: Follow @KurtZindulka or e-mail to: [email protected]
Read the full article here