Day 17 - Flowing justice
- Congregational Federation
- Nov 18
- 3 min read
“Cursed is anyone who withholds justice from the foreigner the fatherless or the widow.” - Deuteronomy 27:19
There are some of the opinion that religious folk should stay out of politics. My response is that those who don’t get involved in politics are still subject to the decisions that politics make, therefore, political involvement is a necessity. So, today, I’d like to address an issue that has been on my mind for a while now – the European Convention on Human Rights.
In simple terms, the ECHR and its attached court serve to outline, codify and enforce basic human rights across its 46 member states. Set up in the late 1940s, the convention was very much a British-led collaborative effort which sought to protect human rights in a post fascist Europe. Not necessarily groundbreaking, it collected many ancient laws, enshrining them, rolling them out across Europe. Today it has 14 articles, alongside minority amendments, known as protocols, which have updated and added to the original framework. Together, these cover anything from preventing the use of torture (Article 3) to slavery (Article 4) and the right to free elections (Article 3, Protocol 1). All very important stuff. I’m sure you’d agree. The UK has it own version, called the Human Rights Act, of which the wording and enforcement is intrinsically bound up in the ECHR. Britain was the first member to ratify the Convention in 1951 and has maintained one of the best records with the court.
But why is it important? Why do we all suddenly hear abut the ECHR? Simple answer – the leaders of two of the major political parties in the UK wish to withdraw us from it.
For context, the only nations ever to leave the Convention, are Russia, who was ejected after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine; and Greece, who left in 1970 while under the control of a dictatorial military junta. Fantastic company, I’m sure you’ll agree!
Now the reasons both leaders give for this decision is that it will give the UK control back of its borders and immigration laws. This argument ignores a few things. First of all, under the UK Human Rights Acts, the UK justice system is able to negotiate with the ECHR in Strasbourg to resolve any conflict. Similarly, despite arguments of overreach and challenge to sovereignty, since 2017, the ECHR has granted only 15 of a possible 660 requests of Rule 39 orders which could potentially block the UK from acting in her own interests and fewer than 1% of foreign criminal who have appealed their deportations to the ECHR have won on Human Rights grounds. On the other side, provision under the Convention have allowed victims of the Rochdale grooming gangs to hold Greater Manchester police to account and forced inquests into the 1989 Hillsborough tragedy.
Withdrawal from the ECHR could jeopardise the post-Brexit deal by straining European relations, and even lead to the collapse of the 1998 Good Friday agreement, where the ECHR acts as a neutral third party in ensuring the agreement is adhered to. It would lead to the need to re-enshrine the Human Rights Act in law, as well as widespread amendments to the justice system and a lack of implied security to us all as we go about out day to day lives.
So perhaps not the quick fix that some politicians believe then?
Surely if we want to show God’s justice to the world, then we do that by treating one another as we would like to be treated ourselves. Jesus said, “Love your neighbour as yourself” (Mark 12:31). Surely we do this by having a justice system that is fair to all and which allows justice to flow like a river out of God’s kingdom and into our own.
Harry Booton
Sources for this reflection:
Comments