The statement from the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC), the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and the Scottish Human Rights Commission (SHRC) highlights the “fundamental role of the ECHR in our everyday rights protections”, including the right to life, freedom from torture, right to private and family life, and freedom of expression.

Together, the institutions also explain the role of the Convention in underpinning constitutional arrangements in Scotland and Northern Ireland. They call on the UK government to commit to no reduction of the rights protections that ECHR brings.

They state: “The ECHR is part of UK law, incorporated by the Human Rights Act 1998, and has shaped our laws ever since. This means that wherever anyone in the UK comes into contact with the state – whether in a school, a hospital, a police station or a care home – their rights are protected and they can seek justice if those rights are breached. These protections belong to all of us, regardless of who we are.

“In Northern Ireland the Human Rights Act also serves as a central safeguard to the peace process, and any weakening of the ECHR’s application would conflict with the UK’s commitments under the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement. The Human Rights Act is also integral to the foundational legislation of the Scottish Parliament.

“Last year 27 out of the 46 Council of Europe member states, including the UK, asserted the need to ‘re-balance’ and ‘clarify’ individual rights and state responsibilities in relation to migration. Those member states expressed an intention to adopt a political declaration relating to ECHR Articles 3 (prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment) and 8 (right to private and family life).

“We urge the UK government to commit to no reduction in rights protections. The principle of universality is fundamental to human rights: rights that can be removed from some people are no longer rights for everyone. The erosion of anyone’s rights puts us all at risk; it signals that these shared standards are not guaranteed and that any of our rights could be subject to debate.

“The ECHR already provides governments with the flexibility to pursue legitimate aims – including managing borders and maintaining public safety – whilst ensuring that minimum protections are upheld for everyone. Public concerns about immigration and border security are a legitimate matter for government attention. But the Convention does not present a barrier to effective immigration control; instead it provides a framework to balance people’s right to private and family life with vital public interests such as national security and prevention of crime; and sets out the limited circumstances in which Article 3 applies to prevent torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.

“We therefore ask that the UK government shares further detail on its proposals, explaining specifically how it intends to ensure there is no reduction in rights protections.”