The sanctity of the ECHR
Sir: Jonathan Sumption’s criticisms of the European Convention on Human Rights (‘Ruled out’, 30 September) are as lucid and as logical as one would expect from such an admired jurist. He provides a persuasive case as to why the UK could withdraw from the ECHR while preserving all the basic rights that we value and which are enshrined by the Convention.
Uncharacteristically, however, he fails to mention the single most important reason why the UK was at the forefront of the creation of the Convention – and the accompanying court – in 1949.
It was not to ensure that basic human rights were enjoyed in the United Kingdom or in other stable democracies which already enjoyed the rule of law and personal freedom. To quote Sir David Maxwell Fyfe, one of the prime authors of the Convention (who became lord chancellor), it was to get a list of ‘basic personal rights to be acknowledged by all governments and a minimum standard of democratic conduct for all members’.
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in