A senior Reform UK figure said the party would staff a new migration ministry only with civil servants who support measures to leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), as former Conservative home secretary Suella Braverman outlined a detailed plan to withdraw from the treaty and urged that judges be appointed by ministers.
Reform UK deputy chairman Richard Tice told reporters on 11 September 2025 that if his party won a general election with a mandate to leave the ECHR, civil servants should either accept that mandate and work to implement it or leave public service. "Bluntly, civil servants need to be told," he said. "Either you accept the mandate of the people and get stuck in, or frankly - in the nicest possible way - go and get a job somewhere else otherwise it's not going to end well." He said a new "department of immigration, a specific border force, who actually believe in the cause of secure borders" would be needed and that those who did not support the policy were "probably not the right person for that job."
Tice spoke alongside Braverman and Tory peer Lord Frost at an event hosted by the Prosperity Institute where Braverman, who has also served as attorney general, published a 50‑page paper titled "Why and How to Leave the ECHR: Roadmap to Freedom." The paper argued the convention has "mutated from a shield against tyranny into a sword against sovereignty," according to excerpts released by organisers.
Braverman told the event that a future government should restore what she called "ministerial power and accountability" over judicial appointments. She proposed scrapping the Judicial Appointments Commission and returning appointments to ministers so judges would not, in her view, be able to frustrate government policy.
The speeches represented a further coalescing of hardline voices on the right over the question of the ECHR and the role of the judiciary. Tice also said Reform would consider rewriting parts of the Good Friday Agreement to remove references to the convention if necessary to enable withdrawal without the support of Northern Ireland's nationalist parties. He said leaving the ECHR could require a referendum on Northern Ireland's constitutional status if that were needed to implement the policy, adding: "If there needs to be a border poll, then the people should have a vote."
Nationalist politicians have warned that departing the ECHR would breach the Good Friday Agreement; Tice said the agreement could be altered to remove references to the convention. Braverman said that, while she had been approached by figures inside Reform about defecting, she remained a Conservative Member of Parliament. "I'm not defecting," she told reporters.
The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg is the ultimate arbiter of the ECHR. Withdrawal from the convention would be a significant constitutional and legal shift with implications for asylum, immigration and human rights law in the United Kingdom. Braverman and other proponents argue the convention constrains the government’s ability to enforce immigration policy; opponents warn that leaving would undermine rights protections and could trigger domestic and international legal and political consequences.
Braverman's call to transfer appointment power to ministers would alter the current system in which the Judicial Appointments Commission plays a central role in selecting judges. The commission was created to provide an independent, merit‑based selection process. Ministers in the UK already make final decisions on senior judicial appointments advised by independent selection bodies and, for some offices, by conventions involving independent panels and consultation. Any move to remove the commission would prompt debate over the balance between judicial independence and ministerial accountability.
The debate over politicizing judicial appointments has parallels in other democracies, including the United States, where presidential nomination and Senate confirmation processes make judicial appointments a central partisan issue. In the UK context, proponents say ministerial control would ensure elected governments can implement policy mandates; critics stress that judicial independence is a bedrock of the rule of law and a safeguard against abuses of power.
Lord Frost, who served as a Cabinet minister and Brexit negotiator, joined the event in support of leaving the ECHR. The three speakers framed their proposals as part of a broader agenda to reclaim sovereignty and strengthen border controls. Critics across the political spectrum have warned that such moves could damage the UK’s international obligations and relationships and spark legal challenges.
Reform UK has repeatedly criticised the Home Office and elements of the civil service as insufficiently committed to strict border enforcement. Tice has described the Home Office as "incompetent" in past comments and said his party would seek to staff immigration roles with officials who share its policy aims.
Observers say any attempt to withdraw from the ECHR or to change the mechanism for judicial appointments would face complex legal, political and practical hurdles, including potential litigation, parliamentary scrutiny and international reactions. Changes touching Northern Ireland and the Good Friday Agreement would also raise sensitive constitutional questions and likely prompt sustained engagement with political parties in Northern Ireland and with international partners.
The speakers' proposals add to an ongoing debate over the relationship between elected governments and independent institutions, including judges and civil servants, and how democracies manage tensions between popular mandates and rights protections. The topics are expected to feature in further policy discussions and political campaigning ahead of future elections.