Soft Power and Hard Law: why the ECHR is in the UK’s National Interest
This paper explains why the UK is safer, stronger and more influential as a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’).
The paper, which includes a foreword by three former Independent Reviewers of Terrorism Legislation, Lord Carlile, Lord Anderson and Sir Max Hill, sets out the practical benefits of the UK being a signatory to the ECHR and a full member of the Council of Europe.
Summary
This paper argues that the United Kingdom remaining a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’), and the Council of Europe is firmly in our national interest because of the diplomatic, security and wider practical benefits it brings.
ECHR withdrawal would weaken the UK’s international authority, reduce valuable forms of cooperation with European partners and create significant legal and political uncertainty.
The paper outlines the important role of the Council of Europe, the ECHR and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), all established in the aftermath of the Second World War, to promote democracy, human rights and the rule of law across Europe. The UK was a founding member and played a leading role in shaping the Convention system.
Through the Human Rights Act 1998, Convention rights are largely enforced by UK courts, allowing human rights disputes to be resolved domestically whilst preserving parliamentary sovereignty. The UK has one of the strongest compliance records and lowest rate of decisions made against it at the ECtHR among member states.
The importance of soft power
A central argument is that ECHR membership strengthens British soft power. Successive governments have presented the UK as committed to the rule of law, international cooperation and human rights. This reputation enhances Britain’s ability to influence international affairs and advocate for democratic values abroad. Withdrawal would risk significant reputational damage and weaken the UK’s credibility when challenging human rights abuses in other states.
The importance of the Council of Europe
It also argues that the Council of Europe has become increasingly important for the UK as one of the principal forums through which the UK engages with European partners and shapes policy on issues such as democracy, artificial intelligence and support for Ukraine.
The Council’s achievements include helping create a death penalty-free Europe, developing anti-torture monitoring mechanisms, supporting democratic elections and establishing the world’s first legally binding international treaty on artificial intelligence.
The UK has played a significant role in many of these initiatives and would lose influence if it left the organisation, as it likely would have to if it withdrew from the ECHR.
The ‘hard law’ consequences of withdrawal: Risking the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement and more
Beyond questions of reputation and influence, the paper highlights the hard law consequences of withdrawal. ECHR membership is embedded within a range of international agreements, most notably the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA).
Withdrawal could jeopardise cooperation on extradition, intelligence sharing, Europol and Eurojust engagement, the exchange of DNA and fingerprint data, and joint efforts against organised crime and people-smuggling networks. Other migration, prisoner-transfer and security agreements also rely on shared commitments to ECHR standards.
Conclusions
The UK should remain a committed signatory to the ECHR and full, engaged member of the Council of Europe. Continued membership protects the UK’s international reputation, supports vital security cooperation and enables collaboration on shared challenges.
Withdrawal would carry substantial diplomatic and practical costs whilst offering limited tangible benefits. The paper therefore concludes that remaining within the ECHR framework is the course most consistent with the UK’s long-term national interest.
Expert commentary
Lord Carlile of Berriew CBE KC:
“Being a signatory to the ECHR makes the UK a safer, stronger, and more influential nation. It supports the cross-border cooperation needed to combat serious crime and gives the UK a powerful voice in shaping European solutions to shared problems.”
Lord Anderson of Ipswich KBE KC:
“The ECHR’s minimum human rights standards underpin every aspect of the police, criminal justice and data cooperation with our neighbours that the effective exercise of our sovereignty requires. This paper makes a powerful and very practical case for staying in.”
Sir Max Hill KCB KC:
“It is a myth that leaving the ECHR and CoE would somehow save and strengthen our sovereignty and justice systems. The opposite is true, as this paper explains with clarity and in detail.”
Read the full paper & other papers in this series
- Click here to read and download the full paper, Soft Power and Hard Law: why the ECHR is in the UK’s National Interest.
- This paper is the second in a JUSTICE series on the ECHR. Click here to read the first paper, From Hillsborough to Rochdale: How the ECHR has helped victims.