3.3 – Global governance: human rights and environmental
3.6 – Comparative theories
European justice ministers, including from the UK, have agreed to negotiate changes to how the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is applied, aiming to make the removal of illegal migrants and foreign offenders easier. Rather than rewriting the treaty entirely, states will pursue a political declaration for adoption in May 2026, focusing on tightening interpretations of Article 3 (inhumane treatment) and Article 8 (family life) so they cannot be interpreted with latitude. The UK Labour government supports reform within the system, contrasting with Conservative and Reform UK calls for withdrawal.
The move reflects tensions created by globalisation, particularly transnational migration flows that challenge state capacity and raise questions about the sovereignty of states to control borders. Critics argue that current human-rights jurisprudence restricts states’ ability to remove migrants, while supporters contend such claims are overstated. From a realist perspective, states are reasserting control over borders and prioritising national security over universal rights norms. The push to constrain Article 3’s scope illustrates states’ preference to maximise autonomy within an anarchical international system. Liberal perspectives, by contrast, view cooperation within the ECHR as essential for maintaining shared moral norms and regional order. The UK’s refusal to leave the ECHR under Labour highlights continued commitment to rule-based governance. Nevertheless, these developments may also reflect English School/ Anarchical Society perspectives, in which the international order is fundamentally characterised by anarchy, but where sovereign states are willing to develop some shared norms and prefer to modify these structures rather than moving towards complete isolationism to maintain predictability and stability.
In terms of regionalism, the initiative underscores the Council of Europe (distinct from the European Union!) as a platform for coordinated responses to migration pressure, showing how regionalism can shape human-rights governance even amid political divergence. The outcome of the negotiations could mark one of the ECHR’s most significant reforms in its 75-year history, reshaping Europe’s balance between international rights protection and sovereign border control.