Richard Ekins

In the debate about withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) enthusiasts for European human rights law often seem to think they have a trump card. Leaving the ECHR, they say, would put the UK in the company of Belarus and Russia, two other European states that are not member states of the ECHR. Strictly

Does the government have the power to strip Alaa Abd El-Fattah of his recently acquired British citizenship? Sources within government reportedly say no. But the relevant legislation is in fact highly permissive. The government cannot avoid taking responsibility for deciding to exercise or not exercise the power to deprive him of his citizenship. The government may decide not

It is twenty-five years to the day since the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) came into force. In that time, human rights law has not become a settled, accepted part of our constitution. To the chagrin and dismay of many lawyers, including no doubt Sir Keir Starmer and Lord Hermer, it remains stubbornly controversial. But the controversy is

Fresh from agreeing to surrender the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, the government may be about to reach an equally damaging agreement with the Republic of Ireland in relation to legacy cases in Northern Ireland. Recent statements by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, suggest that the Northern Ireland Troubles

It has become an article of faith in some quarters that the UK’s withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR) would breach or undermine the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement. The Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, played this card only last week, in response to the Reform party’s proposals for addressing illegal migration. For her part, the Leader of the

When should a foreign offender be deported? The government’s new policy is that foreign offenders should be deported immediately after conviction, rather than after having served some fraction of a sentence of imprisonment imposed by a court. The measure is framed as ‘radical action’ to strengthen border security and to fix the broken criminal justice system, with

Lord Hermer KC has done it again. Delivering RUSI’s annual security lecture this week, the Attorney General set out to ‘depolarise’ the debate about international law, before promptly comparing those who are open to withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) with Carl Schmitt, the notorious German jurist who joined the Nazi party

Is the European Court of Human Rights a foreign court? For the former diplomat Lord Hannay of Chiswick, this ‘lamentable, dog-whistle nomenclature is not even accurate, since the court has had many admirable British judges down the years’.  Strictly, the Strasbourg Court may be an international court rather than a foreign court – and it is true and

The Lady Chief Justice, Baroness Carr, has told reporters that she is “deeply troubled” by a recent exchange between the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition during Prime Minister’s Questions – and that she has written to the Lord Chancellor to complain. This is an extraordinary, and extraordinarily ill-advised, intervention in the political process,

The government’s fealty to human rights law is not in doubt. Still, one might have hoped that the human rights lawyers who dominate this government – the Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer KC and the Attorney General, Lord Hermer KC – would handle human rights law effectively, distinguishing weak from strong arguments and making a reasonable

Our new government’s most closely-held commitment is to the primacy of human rights law. Shortly after taking office, Keir Starmer vowed that under his leadership the UK will ‘never’ leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Last month, the Attorney General, Lord Hermer KC, undertook ‘to counter the false choice, offered by some, between parliamentary democracy and fundamental

Rishi Sunak has promised to respond to the Supreme Court’s judgment that the Rwanda policy is unlawful by agreeing a new treaty with Rwanda and introducing fast-track legislation to parliament. This has been widely ridiculed, as if the proposal were for parliament simply to ignore findings of fact made by the Supreme Court or, worse, for parliament to authorise

The death of Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood means that Britain has lost a great jurist – but also, unusually in this era, a formidable parliamentarian as well. He was a modest, unassuming man (few non-lawyers will know his name), yet he made a remarkable contribution to the law and government of this country, embodying the best

The government’s inability to control our maritime border is a public scandal. Bold action is needed to make crossing the Channel pointless and put the people smugglers out of business. This will be impossible without major legal reform. So it is good news that the government is about to introduce new legislation to Parliament.  The government’s Rwanda plan

Events in Birmingham this week reveal a crisis in the policing of public protest. It was no surprise that protestors would make their views loudly known outside the Conservative party conference. In exercising their rights to assemble and to speak, protestors play an important role in a democracy. But some of those attending the conference,

The Judicial Review and Courts Bill has its second reading today. Writing for the Guardian yesterday, David Davis MP denounced the government’s plans as ‘an obvious attempt to avoid accountability [and] to consolidate power’ which is ‘profoundly un-conservative’. He could not be more wrong. The Bill is a welcome first step in restoring the balance

The return of lockdown measures across parts of northern England, as well as the announcement of dozens of new peerages, almost entirely overshadowed the Lord Chancellor’s launch on Friday of an independent review of administrative law. Lord Faulks QC, former minister of state for justice, is to lead five other barristers and academic lawyers in examining