Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
separation of britain from European Convention on Human Rights ,ECHR), which was once marginal, has become a defining issue for political parties. conservative leader Kemi BadenochThe man who previously opposed leaving Britain has now said that if the Conservatives win the election, he will pull Britain out of the conference.
Nigel Farage’s reform uk It has certainly made the ECHR exit the center of its political identity. Even the Labor government has said it could reform the Convention, or change the way UK courts interpret the law.
The case for leaving is often framed in terms of “sovereignty”, especially in relation to immigration laws and deportation powers.
Politicians argue that the Strasbourg-based European Court of Human RightsWhich invokes the ECHR, overrules “the will of the British people” and demands a return to democratic legitimacy.
But the evidence shows that “the people” don’t really want to leave.
We examined more than a dozen opinion polls conducted by polling agencies, such as YouGovSince 2013. Earlier, that year, it was found to be 48% in favor of withdrawal and 35% in favor of remaining in the ECHR. A year later, the public was evenly divided (41% Leave, 38% Stay), and by 2016, after the Brexit referendum, 42% said Britain should remain in the ECHR, while 35% wanted to leave. Since then, the balance has shifted toward sustainability.
By 2023, half of respondents said the UK should remain a member, while only a quarter supported leaving the ECHR. A June 2025 poll showed similar results: 51% in favor of staying, 27% in favor of leaving and 22% were unsure.
most recently YouGov Data published on 8 October found that 46% of the public are opposed to leaving the ECHR, and 29% say the UK should withdraw.
Even when polls link the ECHR to issues such as deportations to Rwanda, support for return among the general public has not exceeded 38% since 2014.
In contrast, when respondents were given more nuanced choices, support for withdrawal decreased. In the 2024 survey, full support for leaving was only 16% when respondents were offered options such as “Always follow the ECHR, even if it frustrates Parliament” or “Remain committed to the ECHR but give the final decision to Parliament”. With such options, 66% supported some form of continued engagement with the ECHR.
The polling also shows that Conservative and Reform voters are more in favor of leaving the ECHR than Labor and Liberal Democrat voters. In a June YouGov poll on the issue, 54% of Conservative voters and 72% of Reform voters were in favor of leaving the ECHR, while 75% of Labor and Liberal Democrat voters were against leaving.
The general results of voting are reinforced by parliamentary petitions. Since 2023, at least seven petitions have called for withdrawal from the ECHR or a referendum on membership. Neither has come close to the 100,000 signatures needed for debate.
The most recent, which remains open until January 2026, had fewer than 19,000 signatures at the time of writing. In contrast, a petition against digital ID cards quickly gathered 2.8 million signatures.
The evidence is clear: withdrawal requires neither majority support nor political urgency.
Paradox of popular democracy
To its critics, the ECHR is a symbol of foreign interference. The Strasbourg judges are considered to be overriding the authority of Westminster and undermining sovereignty. This framing is powerful in political campaigns, especially when linked to emotive issues such as asylum or terrorism.
But if democracy means following “the will of the people”, the evidence does not support the claim. Over the past decade, at most, only a quarter of voters have supported leaving the ECHR.
And even if public opinion changes, a deeper question remains: should such constitutional decisions depend on a fluctuating majority?
The ECHR was created after World War II to prevent democracy from collapsing into uncontrolled majority rule. Britain played a leading role in drafting it, ensuring that popular sovereignty would be balanced by established rights.
This is why human rights protections are deliberately anti-majoritarian, protecting individuals and minorities from the excesses of majoritarian impulses.
About the authors
Jacques Hartmann is Professor of International Law and Human Rights at the University of Dundee.
Edzia Carvalho is a lecturer in politics at the University of Dundee.
Samuel White is Senior Lecturer in the School of Business and Creative Industries at the University of the West of Scotland.
This article is republished from Conversation Under Creative Commons license. read the original article,
Yet today’s political rhetoric often reverses that logic. By resorting to the language of popular sovereignty to justify withdrawal from the ECHR – despite evidence that the public does not support it – politicians risk undermining the stability those rights were designed to protect. This is of particularly grave concern for the UK, which lacks the constitutional safeguards found in many other democracies.
A large proportion of respondents in the surveys examined were “unsure” about the return – ranging from 15 to 25% across surveys. It is therefore possible that true support for remaining at the ECHR may be higher than headline surveys suggest.
The latest YouGov survey asked respondents how much they knew about the ECHR, and found that only 5% of respondents claimed to know “a lot” about the convention, while 49% said they did not know a lot, and 15% said they knew nothing at all.
Research shows that as knowledge about human rights increases, attitudes toward human rights become more positive. A study by the Scottish Human Rights Commission in 2018 found that indifference often masks confusion rather than hostility.
The Independent Review of the Human Rights Act in 2021 reached a similar conclusion, emphasizing that greater public understanding of human rights institutions strengthens support.
This is why it is important for people and politicians to understand that conventions like the ECHR are not just about migrants and asylum seekers. They defend everyone’s rights in matters that affect us all – from privacy at home and fair treatment in court, to freedom of speech, protection from discrimination and dignity in care.
The growing political momentum for withdrawal from the ECHR does not match popular demand. Instead, politicians are proposing to amend Britain’s constitutional system in the name of “the people”, while ignoring what the majority actually want, destroying constitutional safeguards and democratic institutions in the process.
The lesson of post-war Europe is clear: constitutional safeguards against majority rule are not an obstacle to democracy, but one of its foundations. Abandoning them would not only put the UK at odds with Russia and Belarus – the only European states outside the ECHR – but would also risk repeating the errors the convention was designed to prevent.