Richard Ekins KC (Hon) is Head of Policy Exchange’s Judicial Power Project and Professor of Law and Constitutional Government in the University of Oxford
The Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Alain Berset, has intervened in the debate about ECHR membership, warning the UK that there would be “consequences” if the UK were to leave the Convention. Speaking to POLITICO, he said “It is absolutely possible to leave the convention. Your decision… But what would it mean? It would create a new group of European countries not members of the Council of Europe and not implementing the Convention: Russia, Belarus and the U.K. That would be the consequence.”
This is a misleading claim which cannot go unanswered.
In a thread on X, published on the morning of 6 May, Policy Exchange noted that the Secretary General thinks that “Leaving the European Convention on Human Rights would put the U.K. in a select group with the autocracies of Russia and Belarus”, before going on to say that he should have read our paper Against Cheap Rhetoric which shows that the claim is total nonsense. The quoted words were drawn from the opening line of the POLITICO article, which paraphrased his remarks.
Berset does not clarify the sense in which ECHR withdrawal would supposedly place the UK in company with – in “a new group” with – Belarus and Russia. Would the UK, having left the ECHR, be comparable to these two authoritarian states only in the trivial sense that like them the UK would not be an ECHR member state? Or would it be comparable to them in the more substantive sense that outside the ECHR human rights in the UK would be inadequately protected, or worse would be routinely violated?
The first comparison is uninteresting; the second is impossible to defend.
The Council of Europe denied Belarus admission; Russia was expelled from the Council of Europe in the wake of its invasion of Ukraine, and for that reason ceased to be a member state of the ECHR. Neither state chose to withdraw from the ECHR. If the UK chose to leave the ECHR it would not necessarily leave the Council of Europe, and it is highly unlikely that the Council would expel the UK. If the UK chose to leave the Council of Europe, it would almost certainly take up observer status, and would thus participate in the Council’s activities, as do Canada, the Holy See, Japan, Mexico and the United States. Neither Belarus nor Russia enjoy this status.
Having noted these points, the thread concluded that the Secretary General really should know better and should stop spreading disinformation. The Council of Europe’s Media Department wrote to Policy Exchange later that day pointing out that the Secretary General had not said that leaving the ECHR “would put the U.K. in a select group with the autocracies of Russia and Belarus”; what he had said was that leaving the ECHR “would create a new group of European countries not members of the Council of Europe and not implementing the Convention: Russia, Belarus and the U.K.”
The Secretary General is entitled to be accurately quoted, and Policy Exchange has made a clarification to the thread accordingly.
The Media Department went on to say that “[t]he Secretary General was not making a comparison between the U.K., on one hand, and Russia and Belarus, on the other”; all that he said was that if the UK left the ECHR these three states “would form a group of European countries outside the Council of Europe and not implementing the [ECHR]”. For this reason, the Media Department asserted that Policy Exchange’s criticism of the Secretary General for spreading disinformation was inaccurate.
This is unconvincing.
The Secretary General’s claim was obviously that the UK should not leave the ECHR because doing so would place it in company with Russia and Belarus. This was the “consequence” of which he warned. He may not have termed those two states autocracies, but they obviously are, which is why no sane person in public life welcomes the comparison with them. The Media Department’s denial is hard to credit. Berset asserted that in leaving the ECHR the UK “would create a new group” with them, which implies at least some meaningful comparison and indeed suggests some kind of shared interest, alignment, or common action.
The Media Department did not address the point that leaving the ECHR need not necessarily mean leaving the Council of Europe or, especially, our point that the UK outside the ECHR would be nothing like Russia or Belarus, not only because they are repressive dictatorships whereas the UK is a free and decent democracy, but also because even if the UK chose to leave the Council of Europe it would almost certainly enjoy observer status, like other friendly states elsewhere.
In ignoring these points, which shatter the comparison with Russia and Belarus, the Secretary General misinformed his audience. In failing to have any credible answer to them, the Media Department of the Council of Europe cannot spare his intervention from warranted criticism.
The debate about ECHR membership should not be distorted by specious references to Russia and Belarus.
Richard Ekins KC (Hon) is Head of Policy Exchange’s Judicial Power Project and Professor of Law and Constitutional Government in the University of Oxford
The Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Alain Berset, has intervened in the debate about ECHR membership, warning the UK that there would be “consequences” if the UK were to leave the Convention. Speaking to POLITICO, he said “It is absolutely possible to leave the convention. Your decision… But what would it mean? It would create a new group of European countries not members of the Council of Europe and not implementing the Convention: Russia, Belarus and the U.K. That would be the consequence.”
This is a misleading claim which cannot go unanswered.
In a thread on X, published on the morning of 6 May, Policy Exchange noted that the Secretary General thinks that “Leaving the European Convention on Human Rights would put the U.K. in a select group with the autocracies of Russia and Belarus”, before going on to say that he should have read our paper Against Cheap Rhetoric which shows that the claim is total nonsense. The quoted words were drawn from the opening line of the POLITICO article, which paraphrased his remarks.
Berset does not clarify the sense in which ECHR withdrawal would supposedly place the UK in company with – in “a new group” with – Belarus and Russia. Would the UK, having left the ECHR, be comparable to these two authoritarian states only in the trivial sense that like them the UK would not be an ECHR member state? Or would it be comparable to them in the more substantive sense that outside the ECHR human rights in the UK would be inadequately protected, or worse would be routinely violated?
The first comparison is uninteresting; the second is impossible to defend.
The Council of Europe denied Belarus admission; Russia was expelled from the Council of Europe in the wake of its invasion of Ukraine, and for that reason ceased to be a member state of the ECHR. Neither state chose to withdraw from the ECHR. If the UK chose to leave the ECHR it would not necessarily leave the Council of Europe, and it is highly unlikely that the Council would expel the UK. If the UK chose to leave the Council of Europe, it would almost certainly take up observer status, and would thus participate in the Council’s activities, as do Canada, the Holy See, Japan, Mexico and the United States. Neither Belarus nor Russia enjoy this status.
Having noted these points, the thread concluded that the Secretary General really should know better and should stop spreading disinformation. The Council of Europe’s Media Department wrote to Policy Exchange later that day pointing out that the Secretary General had not said that leaving the ECHR “would put the U.K. in a select group with the autocracies of Russia and Belarus”; what he had said was that leaving the ECHR “would create a new group of European countries not members of the Council of Europe and not implementing the Convention: Russia, Belarus and the U.K.”
The Secretary General is entitled to be accurately quoted, and Policy Exchange has made a clarification to the thread accordingly.
The Media Department went on to say that “[t]he Secretary General was not making a comparison between the U.K., on one hand, and Russia and Belarus, on the other”; all that he said was that if the UK left the ECHR these three states “would form a group of European countries outside the Council of Europe and not implementing the [ECHR]”. For this reason, the Media Department asserted that Policy Exchange’s criticism of the Secretary General for spreading disinformation was inaccurate.
This is unconvincing.
The Secretary General’s claim was obviously that the UK should not leave the ECHR because doing so would place it in company with Russia and Belarus. This was the “consequence” of which he warned. He may not have termed those two states autocracies, but they obviously are, which is why no sane person in public life welcomes the comparison with them. The Media Department’s denial is hard to credit. Berset asserted that in leaving the ECHR the UK “would create a new group” with them, which implies at least some meaningful comparison and indeed suggests some kind of shared interest, alignment, or common action.
The Media Department did not address the point that leaving the ECHR need not necessarily mean leaving the Council of Europe or, especially, our point that the UK outside the ECHR would be nothing like Russia or Belarus, not only because they are repressive dictatorships whereas the UK is a free and decent democracy, but also because even if the UK chose to leave the Council of Europe it would almost certainly enjoy observer status, like other friendly states elsewhere.
In ignoring these points, which shatter the comparison with Russia and Belarus, the Secretary General misinformed his audience. In failing to have any credible answer to them, the Media Department of the Council of Europe cannot spare his intervention from warranted criticism.
The debate about ECHR membership should not be distorted by specious references to Russia and Belarus.