UK Gov’t Admits Human Rights Laws Are Blocking Deportation of Terrorists and Extremists

The British government has confirmed it cannot currently deport hundreds of migrants classified as national security threats, including individuals linked to terrorism and extremism, because of legal constraints tied to human rights law. As a result, authorities are relying on continuous, resource-intensive surveillance of these individuals inside the country instead of removing them.

Round-the-clock monitoring is now required for approximately 170 dangerous foreign nationals who cannot be deported under existing legal frameworks, according to the Sunday Express. These cases fall under protections linked to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which prevents removal in certain circumstances, even when individuals are considered a threat to public safety or national security.

Although Britain left the European Union in 2016, its membership in the ECHR remained unchanged because the convention operates separately from the EU. The institutions share symbolic and structural elements, including a campus in Strasbourg. Successive post-Brexit governments have chosen not to withdraw from the convention, despite mounting public concern over illegal migration and criminality linked to foreign nationals.

In an official impact assessment tied to the government’s proposed Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, the Home Office acknowledged: “Around 170 people are currently on restricted leave, with over half having been involved in terrorism or extremism-related activities.” These individuals cannot be deported but remain subject to strict monitoring due to involvement in “conduct such as war crimes, crimes against humanity, extremism, serious crime or where the person poses a threat to national security or public safety.”

The current system places significant long-term demands on law enforcement, intelligence services, and taxpayer-funded public safety infrastructure. Surveillance, security coordination, and risk management require constant attention, as authorities balance legal compliance with public protection.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has pledged to push for reforms to international arrangements to prevent dangerous individuals from using legal protections to block deportation. Border Security and Asylum Minister Alex Norris said the proposed reforms are designed to strengthen the government’s ability to remove high-risk individuals, stating, “It is disgraceful that terrorists have been able to stay in the UK under previous rules. Our new laws will place strict restrictions on foreign nationals who pose a threat, tracking their every move.” He added, “These laws will also enable us to get terrorists rapidly deported from British soil and keep our country safe.”

The issue has become a central point of political debate in Britain. Conservative Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick argued that the situation demonstrates the need for Britain to withdraw from the ECHR entirely in order to “deport every single one of these terrorists and extremists.” He added, “This government is clueless as to how bad the problem is and how to fix it.”

In October, the governing Labour Party, alongside the Green Party and the Liberal Democrats, voted against a proposal from Reform UK leader Nigel Farage that would have taken Britain out of the ECHR. Mr Farage responded by saying the government is “filled to the brim with woke human rights lawyers” who “prioritise a foreign court in Strasbourg over the security of the British people”.

As the government moves forward with its Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, the situation highlights the growing tension between international legal obligations and domestic public safety demands, with future policy decisions likely to shape how Britain balances civil rights, national sovereignty, and internal security.