Reform’s ECHR plan: Big political stakes, limited effect on immigration
Reform UK says quitting the European Convention on Human Rights will cut immigration. Court records and official guidance suggest otherwise, while withdrawal would reopen sensitive Brexit and Northern Ireland questions.
What you need to know
🔹 Reform UK claims ECHR exit enables tougher removals.
🔹 However, the ECHR sets minimum rights and grants no asylum right.
🔹 It seldom halts removals; backlogs reflect system pressures instead.
🔹 Exit of the ECHR brings diplomatic and legal consequences while migration impacts remain uncertain.
N igel Farage and Reform UK argue that leaving the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) would free Britain to reduce irregular migration and speed removals. Reform’s manifesto pledges to take the UK out of the ECHR and enforce sweeping detention and deportation powers.
The Good Law Project disputes this. They explain that the ECHR does not set immigration policy, does not guarantee a right to enter or remain, and rarely blocks UK deportations. It warns that exit would jeopardise hard-won rights and strain key international agreements.
“Under the European Convention on Human Rights, states are free to set their own immigration policies, and neither the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), nor the European Court of Human Rights (which applies the Convention) dictates what a state’s immigration policy should be,” the Good Law Project says. “The ECHR does not provide a right for people to enter or remain in a country of which they are not a national, or a right to claim asylum.”