Debate about the role of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in the context of immigration has intensified in the UK in recent months. This report identifies and addresses misconceptions widely reported in the media concerning the application of the ECHR to immigration control.
The report is based on a systematic review of media coverage about the ECHR between January and June 2025, wherein it was found that over 75% of the 379 media reports reviewed which mentioned the ECHR focused on the application of the Convention in immigration control, and in particular on the issue of human rights-based appeals against deportation by foreign national offenders.
When subjected to rigorous analysis, fact-checking, and scrutiny of claims made about legal frameworks and cases, the review found that many news reports and opinion pieces about immigration and the ECHR were based on misconceptions, often mischaracterising UK immigration law, the UK’s appeals system, and the role played by the ECHR and the European
Court of Human Rights in this context.
 

• Some reporting and political commentary on deportation cases has been misleading, often mischaracterising UK immigration law, the UK’s appeals system, and the role played by the ECHR and the European Court of Human Rights in this context.
• Focus on, and so public awareness of, a relatively small number of deportation cases obfuscates how exceptional successful claims based on the ECHR are in practice. According to the latest available Home Office statistics running to June 2021, the number of foreign national offenders who successfully appealed against deportation on human rights grounds alone is very small compared to the number of foreign national offenders overall: around 0.73%. The number of human rights-based appeals allowed is also small as a proportion of the number of foreign national offenders who are deported from the UK each year: around 3.5%.
• Media reporting indicates a general misunderstanding of the role of the ECHR in relation to immigration policy. The ECHR does not give anyone a right to live in a country of which they are not a national, and does not provide a right to asylum or to become a citizen.
• There is also a mistaken perception about UK cases before the European Court of Human Rights. Judgments against the UK are rare. Since 1980, the Court has found that a UK government decision to extradite or deport someone would violate the Convention 13 times. Four of these 13 cases concerned the right to family life. In respect of the UK’s immigration rules generally, the Court has ruled against the UK only three times in the past 45 years, in cases related to discrimination.
• Misreporting and inaccurate or incomplete information in public discourse undermines public confidence in the legal system and legal processes, and can lead to an erosion of trust in the rule of law.
• There is a lack of publicly available data on the numbers of foreign national offenders, or other classes of individuals subject to deportation orders, that have made successful ECHR claims. The Home Office does not currently publish regular data on the number or outcome of appeals against deportation of foreign national offenders on human rights grounds. Such publication in future would significantly support evidence-driven policy development and public confidence in the immigration system. 

The authors of the report are:

Victoria Adelmant, Doctoral Researcher in Law, University of Oxford, and Resident at the Bonavero Institute of Human Rights
Alice Donald, Professor of Human Rights Law, Middlesex University London
Başak Çalı, Head of Research at the Bonavero Institute of Human Rights and Professor of International Law

The report was edited by:

Joelle Grogan, Senior Visiting Research Fellow, UCD Sutherland School of Law; and Co-Academic Director, Rule of Law Clinic, CEU Democracy Institute
Philip Leach, Professor of Human Rights Law, Middlesex University London