The Euro Economy

Conservative politicians are bringing the UK into disrepute with an attitude towards the EU’s human rights law which could spell a “political disaster.” This was the opinion expressed by the EU’s most senior judge, Dean Spielmann, who has spoken out against Tory threats to leave the European convention.

Certain senior Conservative MPs, including home secretary Theresa May, have been threatening to pull the UK out of the European convention on human rights. Party members have been indignant that the EU has requested they delay deporting terrorist suspects such as Abu Qatada in order to ensure the criminals will not be subjected to torture.

This is a view against which British judges have already spoken out, saying that measures to avoid the abuse of human rights for criminals are vital.

European court of human rights president, Dean Spiemmann

Dean Spielmann, new president of the European court of human rights in Strasbourg, has criticized the attitude of Conservative politicians on BBC Radio 4’s Law in Action programme, to be broadcast on Tuesday afternoon. He stated that leaving the European convention could result in having to leave the EU itself: “Pulling out of the convention would be plainly a political disaster.

“And I tell you why. Pulling out of the convention would mean that the UK would leave the Council of Europe because it is a pre-condition to being a member state of the Council of Europe to have accepted the European convention.

“And leaving the Council of Europe would probably also mean leaving the European Union because no member state of the European Union is not a member of the Council of Europe. So you see the political implications of such a move would be a total disaster, I think.”

Would the UK really leave the convention? It would be an extreme position to take, considering it comprises 47 member states, including non-EU nations such as Russia and Turkey. To go from being the UK’s current position on the EU to excluding itself from an apparently vital part of it would be drastic to say the least.

But even if the Tories making these threats are not serious about their claims, for Spielmann, they are still bringing themselves trouble. He warned that such an approach will be likely to damage Britain’s international image:

“Such an attitude causes real damage to the UK international reputation, because it undermines the whole system and it causes great damage to the credibility of the United Kingdom when it comes to promoting human rights in other parts of the world.”

The broadcast of Spielmann may well strike a degree of worry into British politicians, whom – regardless of their stance on the European Union – it would not suit to make an enemy of the new president of the EU. Spielmann’s words are a caution for Britons to think twice about the implications of their threats. And that means the implications for themselves as well as for others.

Author :


  1. We can only assume Judge Spielman is living in some sort of news free bubble which given his position is worrying.

    His logic is impeccable, leave the Convention on Human Rights and be forced out of the EU. He may not have noticed but there is something of a heated debate going on in the UK about leaving the EU which has absolutely nothing whatever to do with the ECHR. Most of us (according to polls) do not see leaving the EU as damaging at all.

    The ECHR is an entirely different issue and Judge Spielman should perhaps take a similar position as his UK compatriots, ie restrict himself to legal rulings rather than political speculation.

  2. So what’s his alternative?

    We should just carry on as usual, only pretending that everything’s just fine with the way the Convention’s being implemented?

  3. We vote AND PAY for our Politicians to Govern our Country according to our Longstanding Common law Constitution. THIS they cannot do as long as they remain in the EU and the Charter of Human Rights. Our own Judges are more than capable of decided what should be done with their own Citizens if the “hit the buffers”, AND ACCORDING TO OUR LAWS.

    Our Politicians swear allegiance to the British Crown. Under that Crown we have our own Constitution, plus all those we elect swear a solemn and true allegiance to that Crown and the wearer of that Crown. It should also be born in mind that, even as MP’s step forward in the House of Commons to place their hand on the Bible and swear the Oath, that Oath ends with the words , “ACCORDING TO LAW”. This is the Executive ECHOING the Queen’s own Coronation Oath. There are TWO OATHS operative here, to protect the nation and the people. The Queen’s Oath, and the Oath of her Executive to her. They are interlocking oaths to respect the RULE OF LAW at all times.

    We do not need any other to speak for us. This we can do for ourselves.

  4. Unfortunately, this sad little political clown Spielmann hasn’t figured out that the UK is going to have a referendum on our EU membership which will almost certainly result in our departure.

    He’s just reason # 12 345 678 to leave.

  5. Thje people of this Country can no longer continue to pay for Two Governments-one of which has to obey the other, and three Parliaments two of which have to obey the other one. Ask those in the Houses of Parliament which ones they want to keep -forever. THE PEOPLE CAN NO LONGER AFFORD TO PAY FOR ALL, SO WHICH ONES SHOULD THEY KEEP? COME ON. Make your minds up. Time is running out for the EU is looking at 2020. 2030, and even 2050. And if you think our present PM is wanting out of the EU, why has he written this?

    EU states fail to back British goal to halve emissions by 2030 03 Sep 2013 17:31 Last updated: 03 Sep 2013 17:33 LONDON, Sep 3 (Reuters Point Carbon) – Britain’s call for the EU to halve its greenhouse gas output by 2030 appears to have little support among other member states, EU documents showed Tuesday, casting doubt on the likelihood that the bloc will agree such a deep medium-term goal to tackle climate change.

Comments are closed.