Rishi Sunak has delivered a brutally brunt response to an SNP MP’s question about the European Court of Human Rights and International Criminal Court.
The Prime Minister, who is claimed to be weighing up whether the UK should remain apart of the Strasbourg legal framework, rubbished Patrick Grady during a brief exchange.
The SNP’s chief whip said: “To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to the Answer of March 20, 2024, to Question 18492 on European Court of Human Rights, whether he considers the International Criminal Court to be a foreign court.”
Replying today, Sunak curtly quipped: “The clue is in the name.”
Rishi Sunak with Patrick Grady and an inset of the ECHR
GETTY
The International Criminal Court, which is based in The Hague, is hearing a number of high profile cases.
An investigation into war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide ensured an arrested warrant was issued for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Warrants were separately issued for Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony and Congolese war criminal Thomas Lubanga Dyilo.
Britain joined the International Criminal Court in November 1998, a number of decades after entering the ECHR in 1953.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
People enter the International Criminal Court, 20 June 2006 in the Hague
GETTY
Questions about whether the International Criminal Court is foreign comes amid growing calls for the UK to leave the Strasbourg court to push on with its Rwanda immigration plan.
The Prime Minister hinted at potentially leaving the court, which appoints judges through the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe, after an increasing number of Tory rebels voiced concert about overreach from Strasbourg.
He said: “I believe that all plans are compliant with all of our international obligations including the ECHR, but I do believe that border security and making sure that we can control illegal migration is more important than membership of a foreign court because it’s fundamental to our sovereignty as a country.”
The ECHR has played a pivotal role in delaying Sunak’s strategy to curb the number of illegal immigrants crossing the Channel.
An urgent injunction was issued in June 2022 which prevented the removal of an asylum seeker to Rwanda as part of the UK-Rwanda asylum agreement until the legality of the scheme had been finally established in UK courts.
Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights addressing torture or inhuman or degrading treatment was also cited by the Supreme Court when it upheld the Court of Appeal’s judgment on the Rwanda policy being “unlawful”.
Leaving the ECHR would leave the ECHR without a codified and legally binding human rights instrument.
Despite historic documents, including the Magna Carta of 1215 and the Bill of Rights of 1689 imposing certain protections, such rights have not been protected to the extent it has been covered by the ECHR or Human Rights Act.
Withdrawing from the Strasbourg court could create issues for the Good Friday Agreement and the UK’s post-Brexit trade accord with the EU.
However, the Prime Minister could face a Cabinet revolt if he opts to leave the ECHR.
At least 12 Cabinet Ministers are understood to oppose cutting ties with the Strasbourg court, including Chancellor Jeremy Hunt and Justice Secretary Alex Chalk.
However, Brexit-backing MPs also expressed concern, with Home Secretary James Cleverly named as an opponent to the judicial switch.
Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch and Environment Secretary Steve Barclay, who both campaigned to leave the EU in 2016, have both been tipped to either favour or be open to the prospect of the move.
