Starmer and hardline governments risk creating ‘hierarchy of people’ by constraining human rights

1 day ago7 min read1 comments

The political landscape across Europe is hardening, and the latest warning from the continent’s top human rights official should serve as a sobering historical echo. Michael O’Flaherty, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, has issued a stark admonition to figures like Britain’s Keir Starmer and other centrist leaders who are adopting increasingly stringent measures to address migration.In doing so, O’Flaherty argues, they risk constructing a perilous 'hierarchy of people' by constraining fundamental rights, a strategy that ultimately plays directly into the tactical playbook of the populist right. This isn't merely a policy critique; it's an observation of a profound strategic miscalculation by the political middle, one that history has seen before.When mainstream parties begin to co-opt the rhetoric and policies of their fringe opponents in a bid to neutralize them, they often succeed only in normalizing and legitimizing those very ideas, shifting the entire Overton window of acceptable discourse. The current drive, visible in the UK's renewed deportation schemes and similar border-focused initiatives in several EU states, involves redefining or circumventing established human rights frameworks—particularly the European Convention on Human Rights—under the banner of pragmatic crisis management.Yet, as O’Flaherty implies, this pragmatism is a Faustian bargain. By creating legal distinctions that dilute universal protections, governments inadvertently validate the populist narrative that certain groups are less deserving of those protections, eroding the very principle of inalienable dignity that was so painfully cemented after the Second World War.The consequences extend far beyond immigration policy. Once a precedent is set that rights can be selectively applied based on nationality or legal status, it creates a slippery slope that can be exploited to target other minorities or dissenters in the future.Furthermore, this approach fails to address the root causes of migration—conflict, climate change, economic disparity—and instead invests political capital in enforcement regimes that are often costly, legally contentious, and of limited long-term efficacy. Analysts note that this trend leaves the populist right in an enviable position: either the hardline policies succeed, allowing them to claim vindication, or they fail, enabling them to argue that the measures were not severe enough.For leaders like Starmer, who seek to project stability and competence, the temptation to adopt a tough stance is understandable amid electoral pressures, but the strategic cost may be the irreversible corrosion of the liberal democratic norms they purport to defend. The situation presents a critical test for the European project itself, challenging the cohesion of the Council of Europe and the authority of the Strasbourg court. As middle-ground politicians navigate this complex terrain, they would do well to remember that the most durable solutions are those that reinforce, rather than undermine, the foundational rights that distinguish democratic societies from illiberal ones.

#lead focus news

#Keir Starmer

#migration policy

#human rights

#Council of Europe

#Michael O'Flaherty

#populism