Human Rights Day 2025: Civil Society Gathering

Sarah spoke about human rights as practical tools for legal accountability rather than abstract ideals. She explained that Leigh Day’s human rights department was established in 2001 following the introduction of the Human Rights Act (HRA), which enables individuals to challenge rights infringements in UK courts and prevents public bodies from overreaching. The HRA, she noted, benefits both individuals and government by providing quicker, lower-cost, UK-specific routes to justice. It has also driven a sea change in how vulnerable people are treated in prisons, hospitals, and care homes.

Sarah talked through specific case examples from her work involving Article 2 (right to life), Article 5 (right to liberty), and Articles 8 and 10 (private, family life, home and correspondence and freedom of expression), illustrating how these rights work in practice to provide justice to people and their loved ones. She highlighted how Article 2 strengthens inquests and accountability, how Article 5 provides vital safeguards for people facing restrictive care arrangements, and how the balance between Articles 8 and 10 can protect vulnerable individuals while maintaining open justice. Together, these examples showed the practical impact and protective power of the ECHR in people’s everyday lives.

Sarah concluded that what unites all these cases is the framework the ECHR provides. Although these stories rarely dominate headlines, they embody the universality of our Human Rights Act as a vital safeguard against state power. Most people may never need to rely on them directly, but ensuring that the most vulnerable can do so is fundamental to a fair and just society.

Alice spoke about two new reports she has co-authored with the Bonavero Institute, which complement BIHR’s ECHR 75th anniversary zine.

The first report, published in September, examined media coverage of the ECHR. Monitoring legacy media from January to June showed that around 75% of references to the ECHR focused on immigration; a disproportionate emphasis given the Convention’s broad remit. Much of this coverage was negative and, when fact-checked, often misleading about the role of the Court. She noted a lack of reliable government data on human rights claims, creating a vacuum in which inaccurate stories such as the long-misreported “chicken nugget case” continue to circulate. This highlighted the need for civil society to tell its own stories which Alice thanked BIHR for doing so brilliantly.

Alice’s second report, published today, sets out 10 reasons for the UK to remain in the ECHR, demonstrating how the Convention protects people at their most vulnerable and brings wider benefits, including supporting peace in Northern Ireland and strengthening the UK’s international standing.

She addressed why “informing the public debate” matters:

Debate is healthy but it must be informed. The ECHR was designed to evolve over time, and reform should respond to real evidence, not misconceptions dominated by immigration narratives.
The ECHR is not broadly unpopular. Recent polling shows more people support staying in the Convention than leaving it, with even higher support across the devolved nations. However, many people lack basic understanding of how the ECHR works, leaving space for loud, well-funded voices to shape the narrative.
We need to find our voice. Proposals to leave the ECHR place the UK at odds with mainstream European politics; elsewhere, such ideas appear only at the far-right margins. The UK has an extremely strong record before the Court, yet a small number of commentators dominate the debate.

Alice stressed that human rights work is also a visibility and communications project, that we must tell a different, truer story about human rights in the UK. With Ministers meeting in Strasbourg today, this is a dangerous moment for human rights in Europe, with discussions about “reform” or “modernisation” of the ECHR, particularly around immigration.

She warned of the risk of negative contagion across states: moves by the UK could weaken protections such as Article 3 and alienate those who depend on them most. The message was clear, we must mobilise and organise to ensure we do not return to a place where these fundamental protections are eroded.

Kevin Hanratty reflected on the 75th anniversary of the ECHR through the lens of Northern Ireland’s peace process. He began by recalling the atmosphere of 1998, when the Good Friday Agreement offered a generation raised during the Troubles a chance at lasting peace. From the outset, the Agreement recognised that reconciliation required not only political structures but the “protection and vindication of the human rights of all.”

Kevin emphasised that while the Good Friday Agreement is often associated with ending violence and establishing power-sharing, its foundation rests on a quieter architecture: the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights. During the Troubles, the ECHR had already served as a vital route to justice at a time when trust in domestic institutions was low. In the peace negotiations, embedding the ECHR through the Human Rights Act became one of the most important confidence-building measures, addressing fears across both communities and ensuring that newly shared political power would be bound by law.

He noted that although progress on a dedicated Northern Ireland Bill of Rights has stalled, the ECHR and the Human Rights Act have endured and remain essential safeguards. For 25 years, they have provided stability and reassurance, acting as the legal spine supporting peace and equality.

Kevin reflected on voting for the Agreement at age 20, believing he was helping to build something monumental. The commitments to rights, particularly the ECHR were central to that hope. To remove those protections now, he warned, would betray the trust placed in the peace settlement by an entire generation.

He concluded by urging that the ECHR be protected and celebrated as a cornerstone of Northern Ireland’s peace, honouring both the suffering that preceded it and the shared future it continues to support.

Hanna Gawron shared her personal experience of how human rights, particularly under the ECHR, quietly supported her during her time in mental health care and education. She explained that while she didn’t know about the ECHR at the time, its protections shaped her day-to-day life and helped her hold on to her identity and dignity.

She highlighted how various rights impacted her experience: the right to private and family life allowed regular contact with parents and friends; freedom of expression and thought provided space for creativity and honest reflection; protection from inhuman or degrading treatment ensured safe and supportive care; liberty and possession rights allowed personal autonomy through possession of clothing, books, and art materials; and, crucially, the right to education enabled her to continue learning even when admitted to hospital.

Hanna described how hospital and mainstream schools worked together to support her return to education after her diagnosis of ADHD and autism, allowing her to rebuild her studies on her own timeline. These rights, she explained, carried her through her degree and career in mental health services, and ultimately to speaking at this event.

She emphasised that human rights are not confined to courts or political debates. For her, they existed in everyday moments, phone calls home, art sessions, conversations with staff, freedom to move around, and the ability to keep learning. While they did not make challenges disappear, they helped her maintain dignity, choice, and hope.

Hanna concluded by stressing that as we celebrate 75 years of the ECHR, human rights should be understood as practical protections that enable young people not just to survive, but to grow through difficult experiences with respect and autonomy.

Tom opened by stressing the deeply human and profoundly important issue of protecting the rights of people affected by substance use, and the vital role of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in that protection.

Substance use whether occasional, dependent, or rooted in trauma, poverty, or ill health is often discussed as a social, criminal justice, or health issue. But at its core, it is a human experience, and those affected are first and foremost rights-holders, entitled to dignity, fairness, protection, and compassion.

Across the UK, people affected by substance use frequently face discrimination, stigma, and exclusion, encountering barriers to healthcare, unsafe living conditions, and punitive systems that deepen harm. Too often, they are treated as problems to manage rather than citizens with rights.

The ECHR sets out fundamental rights for everyone, including the right to life, health-related protections via the right to private life, freedom from inhumane or degrading treatment, due process, and non-discrimination. These rights do not disappear because someone uses drugs or faces stigma. Human rights are universal precisely because they protect those whose dignity is most vulnerable.

Tom highlighted the Scottish Government’s progressive approach to human rights and the Scottish Recovery Consortium’s work with BIHR to build knowledge among Lived Experience Recovery Organisations. He shared an example: a recovery development worker visiting a police custody suite challenged the refusal of medical care for someone in severe opiate withdrawal by referencing Article 3 duties. Within an hour, medical attention was provided, showing how informal human-rights-based interventions can improve care and outcomes without court action.

The ECHR also underpins a public-health, evidence-based approach to substance use. A human-rights lens guides support for recovery, harm reduction services, medication-assisted treatment, naloxone provision, overdose prevention, and safe consumption spaces, interventions that protect life and health, respect agency, reduce suffering, and provide pathways to support rather than punishment.

A human-rights-based approach transforms how society sees people who use drugs, moving from stereotypes to empathy, punishment to care, and exclusion to inclusion. This requires listening to people with lived experience, whose insight should guide policy, shape services, and inform every discussion about rights and substance use. Upholding their dignity is both a legal and moral obligation.

Tom concluded that the measure of a society is how it treats its most marginalised. Protecting the rights of people affected by substance use strengthens public health, affirms universal dignity, and upholds human rights for all. The ECHR must continue to be used as a living instrument to ensure everyone is treated with fairness, humanity, and respect.

Karen spoke about the work of her community-led organisation, which provides immigration, housing, welfare advice, employment support, and services for children and young people. She highlighted the rising anti-migrant rhetoric in the UK, noting that the people they support experience dehumanisation and scapegoating every day. In this context, human rights frameworks — particularly the HRA and ECHR — are immediate and essential safeguards when other protections are narrowing.

Over the past 18 months, through the programme with BIHR, everyone in Karen’s organisation has received training on the HRA, and they co-created a new guide with people navigating the SEND system, grounding their work in rights. Karen emphasised the need to protect the rights of migrant children with SEND, many of whom feel forgotten and blamed, and highlighted the importance of rights that cannot be taken away.

She shared examples from casework: a pregnant Latin American woman who was never offered an interpreter during hospital visits eventually received support through HRA advocacy; and a visually impaired client in unsuitable housing was successfully moved to an accessible home through sustained rights-based advocacy.

Karen stressed that human rights strengthen community advocacy, help public bodies understand their obligations, and remind everyone that rights are universal, not conditional on immigration status. Her work demonstrates the practical power of rights in protecting and empowering marginalised communities every day.

Imran Khan KC highlighted the challenges faced in ensuring human rights are taken seriously not just as legal instruments, but as living, breathing frameworks. He emphasised that empowerment through human rights does not happen by accident. Implementation often occurs behind the scenes, away from headlines, but it is precisely in these everyday applications that human rights make a real difference.

He noted that the Human Rights Act has faced sustained political attacks in recent years, with anti-rights rhetoric creating risks of repeal, erosion, or underuse driven by fear. Khan stressed the importance of building resilience and recognised that community support and advocacy work are central to sustaining human rights protections.

The event ended with comments, questions and discussion. The discussion brought together a wide range of voices, all reflecting deep concern about the future of the Human Rights Act and the European Convention on Human Rights. Participants raised issues around accountability, the need for stronger compliance with existing duties, and the real-world impact of rights such as protection from torture, inhumane and degrading treatment (Article 3) and private, family life, home and correspondence (Article 8) for people in care, migrant communities, survivors of abuse, and others whose dignity is most at risk. Several speakers highlighted how easily universality can be eroded and emphasised the importance of speaking out against attempts to weaken fundamental protections. There were clear pleas for collective action from demanding more of national institutions, to strengthening education, to ensuring lived experience remains central. Above all, the room shared a strong sense of solidarity and a commitment to defending human rights through practical use, community support, and a united civil society.