Human rights laws 'are not protecting the vast majority of UK citizens'

MINISTERS must stop bowing to human rights rulings made by 'woke' judges which then benefit bogus asylum seekers, terrorists and strikers, a blistering report has claimed

- Sam Lister

Analysis by a senior lawyer found that politically correct rulings protect special interest groups instead of the majority.

The barrister's findings have reignited Tory calls for Britain to quit the European human rights treaty.

Exploited

Michael Arnheim warned that it is liberal judges, not elected MPs, who are effectively making rules which are being ruthlessly exploited.

His report Fixing Human Rights Law, published by the independent Civitas think-tank, has accused the Government of slavishly accepting a "liberal" misinterpretation by British courts of Strasbourg's rules.

Mr Arnheim wrote: "Human rights law does not actually protect the mass of law-abiding citizens, who should be its beneficiaries, but instead benefits a motley assortment of special interest groups including illegal migrants, bogus asylum seekers, terrorist suspects, disruptive protesters, strikers and the beneficiaries of 'mission creep' and 'politically correct' and simply wrong and unjust court decisions." The report advises that migrants' dinghies ought to be escorted back across the Channel and suggests that UK beaches could be patrolled vigorously, with a wartime-style Home Guard deployed.

It also proposes that applications for asylum or visas should not be accepted from anyone on UK soil.

Mr Arnheim, sometime Fellow of St John's College, Cambridge, said human rights laws are failing to take account of the rights of other citizens when claims are made.

Disruption