Why we - and the Home Secretary - disapply the ECHR at our peril

What do you think of when you think of diamonds? Jewellery (obviously), mining, that James Bond theme or carbon if you remember your GCSE chemistry. Those ancient atoms were buried hundreds of kilometres below the earth’s crust. Subjected to scorching heat and unimaginable pressure, while billions of years went by. The gems are then slowly pushed towards the surface by shifting rock and volcanic eruptions, hacked from the darkness, and held up as a symbol of eternity. Diamonds, they say, are forever… if only.

While many of us will think of a 60th anniversary, diamonds are also the chosen symbol of 75 years. Earlier this month, an institution reached its own 75th anniversary but is hitting the headlines again today. The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was also formed by extreme stress - of brutal war and atrocities previously beyond imagining. It emerged from the depths and darkness of the 20th century, thanks to the determination of those who vowed ‘never again’. It recognises and protects the value of every individual’s life, their innate dignity, and unique worth. We all of us benefit from these safeguards being upheld. It should be held up to the light, as a shining example of what humanity can achieve.

But, evidently, not everyone agrees. Our membership of the convention, which is not part of and predates the European Union (EU), has become the top target for blame for the consequences of a changing world. A world in which conflict and climate change mean more desperate people are displaced.

Today, home secretary Shabana Mahmood has unveiled proposals - as part of Labour’s plans for sweeping new changes to the UK’s asylum system - to legislate to limit the extent courts can can use the ECHR’s Article 3 (protection from torture) and Article 8 (right to a family life) to restrict removals. We should note that according to the University of Oxford since 1980, the ECHR has found against the UK in only 13 removal cases, and just four of those concerned family life”. The study also found that “in relation to immigration rules more broadly, the Court has only three times ruled that the UK’s immigration rules violate the ECHR in the past 45 years”.

The fact that Mahmood’s proposals have been welcomed by both Reform UK leader Nigel Farage and far-right activist Tommy Robinson (aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) should suggest to the government that they need to rethink. But this isn’t just a moral failure, it’s a complete misreading of the political runes.

Best for Britain has been tracking support for Reform UK back even before it was the Brexit Party. Our data consistently shows that increasing the temperature on immigration and asylum has no benefit for the government. Indeed quite the opposite. Alongside motivating support for Reform UK, it pushes even more progressive minded voters towards the Lib Dems and Greens.

But beyond the politics, it’s vital we understand what’s really happening here. It’s the same argument my Granny made when she used to remind me to make sure I voted. She would say, “women died for your right to do so” not all that long ago - as did men, who fought to expand the franchise and fought to defend democracy. Don’t take it for granted. But we do. Those seeking to remove the UK from the ECHR are betting they can remove rights from all of us because we cannot imagine a world without them.

Here are the rights - your rights - that are protected by the ECHR. Are there any you’d rather were less well-protected? Do you trust politicians to rewrite them?

• Article 1: Obligation to respect human rights

• Article 2: Right to life

• Article 3: Prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment

• Article 4: Prohibition of slavery and forced labour

• Article 5: Right to liberty and security

• Article 6: Right to a fair trial

• Article 7: No punishment without law

• Article 8 : Right to respect privacy and family life

• Article 9: Freedom of thought, conscience and religion

• Article 10: Freedom of expression

• Article 11: Freedom of assembly and association

• Article 12: Right to marry

• Article 13: Right to an effective remedy

• Article 14: Prohibition of discrimination

• Article 15: Derogation in time of emergency

• Article 16: Restriction on political activity of non-nationals

• Article 17: Prohibition of abuse of rights

• Article 18: Limitation on use of restriction of rights

Just ask the families of those who died in the Hillsborough disaster, who were able to seek justice thanks to the protections of Article 2 (right to life). Or those who successfully fought for the decriminalisation of homosexual acts in Northern Ireland, or against the ban on LGBT+ people serving in the armed forces. The ECHR protects the rights of each and every one of us. Their power lies in the fact that they must apply just as much to the people we may dislike or disagree with, because there may come a time when someone in power disagrees with you.

We are so far from the world of previous generations - the people who really did die for the freedoms and protections we enjoy - that we devalue them. We consider giving them up. To stretch the diamond analogy to its absolute maximum: precious heirlooms can get a bit dusty, after three-quarters of a century. Tucked away in an old box somewhere, their value is overlooked, ignored. Taken for granted. We may even think about pawning them.

Perhaps it’s time we take it out, blow the dust away, remember what this particular diamond represents and start holding it up to the light again.

Jessica Frank Keyes is the deputy editor of the Best for Britain Wire