A mi marido Josep
4. RESULTADOS 96 1 Distribución del Nervio laringeo interno
1.3. PARAGANGLIOS LARINGEOS.
1.3.5 Péptidos reguladores implicados en la inervación de los paraganglios laríngeos
Dr Matt Beech (Director of the Centre for British Politics) and Dr Peter Munce
(Leverhulme Early Career Fellow), Centre for British Politics, School of Politics, Philosophy and International Studies, University of Hull.
[email protected] [email protected]
Introduction
1. This submission deals with the specific issue of the UK’s relationship with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It seeks to bring to the attention of the Committee the impact that a potential withdrawal from the Convention might have on the range of soft power options available to the UK.
2. The present policy of the Coalition Government as contained in the Programme for Government is not to withdraw. A Commission was established by the Coalition in March 2011 to ‘investigate the creation of a British Bill of Rights that incorporates and builds on all our obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, ensures that these rights continue to be enshrined in British law, and protects and extends British liberties’39. However, ECHR withdrawal is an option being seriously considered by senior Conservatives as a potential policy option for any future Conservative government.
Tensions within the Conservative Party
3. There are significant tensions within the Conservative Party about UK membership of the ECHR in particular the influence in the UK of European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) jurisprudence.
4. During a debate in the House of Commons on the impact of the ECtHR’s decision in Hirst v UK40 which ruled that a blanket ban on voting for prisoners was a breach of article 3 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR a number of Conservative MPs expressed their discontent at the Strasbourg Court’s decision. One Conservative MP during the debate argued that, ‘The bottom line for me is that there would be less shame in leaving the European convention on human rights than in giving prisoners the vote’.41
5. During a debate in the House of Commons on the 7th February on the issues surrounding the deportation of Abu Qatada another Conservative MP said, ‘What the British public want to know is this: if we cannot secure the reforms that we need from the European Court of Human Rights, will we withdraw from the
39 Programme for Government, p.11
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/78977/coalition_programme_for_government .pdf (last accessed 18th September, 2013).
40 (No. 2) - 74025/01 [2005] ECHR 681 (6 October 2005) 41 Philip Holloborne HC Debs 10 Feb 2011 vol 523 cc 537.
186
European convention? In the absence of that commitment, the Home Secretary will simply be spitting in the wind’.42
6. The most senior Conservative to express discontent was the Home Secretary, Theresa May who in a speech on 9th March, 2013 said that, ‘by 2015 we’ll need a plan for dealing with the European Court of Human Rights. And yes, I want to be clear that all options – including leaving the Convention altogether – should be on the table’43.
7. Not all elements of the Conservative Party agree with this direction, most notably the Attorney General who warned that if the UK withdrew it would risk being viewed as a ‘pariah state’ by the international community44. Previously, whilst in opposition he stated that withdrawing from the Convention would, ‘Send a very damaging signal about how the UK viewed the place and promotion of human rights and liberties and would be an encouragement to every tin pot dictator such as Robert Mugabe, who violates them. Nor, if a UK government intends to behave in an ethical manner, would withdrawal solve many of the problems now blamed on the ECHR itself.’45
Background to the ECHR
8. The ECHR is an international treaty devised by the Member States of the Council of Europe and was drafted by the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly Committee on Legal and Administrative Questions, which was chaired by the Conservative politician Sir David Maxwell – Fyfe.
9. The Convention has recently celebrated its 60th anniversary entering into force in September 1953. The UK was one of the first to sign the Convention in 1951. The Council of Europe was founded in 1949 and now has 47 Member States from across the continent of Europe including those new democracies that emerged after the break – up of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin Wall. It is an international organisation, whose primary objective is to, ‘create a common
democratic and legal area throughout the whole of the continent, ensuring respect for its fundamental values: human rights, democracy and the rule of law’46. The ECHR is highly regarded and considered as one of the crowning achievements of the Council of Europe by a range of international human rights lawyers and scholars.
10.In recent years the power and influence of the Court has grown significantly due to reforms in how the Court operates, the Eastward expansion of the Council of
42 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201212/cmhansrd/cm120207/debtext/120207-0001.htm (last accessed, 18th
September, 2013).
43 http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2013/03/full-text-of-theresa-mays-speech-we-will-win-by-being-the-party-
for-all.html (last accessed, 18th September, 2013).
44 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9596949/Britain-could-become-Belarus-if-it-abandons-human-rights-legislation-
warns-Attorney-General.html (last accessed, 18th September, 2013)
45 Speech by Dominic Grieve MP to the Middle Temple, ‘Can the Bill of Rights do better than the Human Rights Act?’ 30th
November 2009 http://www.dominicgrieve.org.uk/news/can-bill-rights-do-better-human-rights-act (last accessed, 18th September, 2013).
187
Europe and a desire on behalf of the judges to view the Convention as a ‘living instrument’.
Questions for the Committee to consider
11.This evidence has outlined the serious concerns Conservatives have about and poses the following question for the Committee to consider:
12. Is it in UK national interest to withdraw unilaterally from the ECHR? If so, what sort of example would the UK be setting by withdrawing from the ECHR even on a temporary basis? What credibility or moral authority will the UK have to raise concerns about states that fall short of internationally accepted standards about the protection of rights?
13.The implications of the UK’s withdrawal from the ECHR need to be properly thought through and all aspects of the debate seriously considered. In other words, in an era of international relations when soft power options are increasingly relied upon by states in the pursuit of their foreign policy objectives can the UK really afford to leave itself open to accusations of double standards in an increasingly fragile and uncertain global order?
14. British withdrawal from the ECHR would provide the United States with a human rights problem. How can future American-led initiatives and interventions include Britain as a primary partner if the international community (particularly Russia and China) assert that Britain is casual about human rights?
15. The United States seeks to utilise both soft and hard power when encouraging political liberalisation in authoritarian regimes and emerging democracies. What about the human rights problem of Britain? Surely the United States would have to robustly address this fact in some manner and one highly embarrassing for Britain. 16.The problem of Britain withdrawing from the ECHR presents the United States
with an awkward human rights problem. One that has implications for how it relates to its other foreign policy priorities. Of these a notable priority is its relationship with China. The traditional approach to China has been to encourage trade and cultural exchanges in the hope that this emboldens reformers in the Communist Party and leads to a western facing Beijing that respects human rights. However, in recent years life in China has improved for many but summary
violence and abuses continue. The United States knows this and seeks to engage the PRC on these issues. How effectively will the United States be in presenting the western example of universal human rights recognition if Britain withdraws from the ECHR? Surely, this weakens the American diplomatic position as Britain is their primary diplomatic and military partner.
17.The UK government believes that the best way for China to achieve economic prosperity and stability in the future is for it to protect fundamental rights and uphold the rule of law. How would the Chinese government perceive UK
188
18. Does withdrawal from the ECHR not place Britain in a weaker position with Russia? As Britain would be voluntarily giving up a degree of moral authority on the issue of human rights. The British case for persuading and, at times,
confronting Russia over its record on human rights and civil liberties would
become redundant as the force of Britain’s argument would be rendered impotent.
Conclusion
19. In a multipolar and globally interdependent world states need all soft power options available to them particularly one as politically significant and symbolically important as being a signatory to the ECHR.
20. Withdrawal from the ECHR could have major foreign policy ramifications for Britain. Chief among these is a degree of isolation from the United States. Britain will not be seen as an exemplar of advanced democracy that values human rights. Britain’s relationship with its European neighbours will change to the point where its contributions to debates about diplomatic and social issues will be respected less and deemed to be outside of settled norms. Withdrawal from the ECHR in terms of British influence would be a retrograde step.
189