In a provocative address at the Royal United Services Institute, Attorney General Richard Hermer has likened contemporary discussions around the UK's potential exit from international courts to the rhetoric employed by Nazi Germany in the early 1930s. Hermer condemned the notion that Britain could neglect its international obligations, proclaiming it a “radical departure from the UK’s constitutional tradition.” This alarming comparison underscores a broader political discourse that has ignited heated debate within the UK about its role in global governance and human rights enforcement.

Hermer specifically referred to the ideas of the German jurist Carl Schmitt, who articulated a vision of state power overriding legal frameworks. He remarked, “This is not a new song,” highlighting the historical precedent set by those who sought to dismiss the constraints imposed by international law during a period that led to catastrophic consequences. As the Attorney General noted, the response to such ideologies shaped the reconstruction of international legal institutions after Adolf Hitler's ascent to power in 1933, suggesting that the lessons of history remain painfully relevant today.

The backdrop to this controversy includes remarks from key political figures, such as Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage, both of whom have hinted at a potential withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Badenoch's position, though not a direct call to exit the ECHR, suggests readiness to abandon obligations if they impede national security, echoing sentiments that Hermer strongly rebuffed. He argues that such an approach could embolden adversaries like Vladimir Putin, signalling a retreat from the values underpinning a rules-based order, which has long been a cornerstone of British foreign policy.

Moreover, Hermer's advocacy for international law as essential for securing Britain’s influence and stability in global politics aligns with a growing consensus among moderates. Reflecting on the UK’s historical role in shaping international law, he stressed the importance of adhering to established legal frameworks, suggesting that veering away from these commitments would render the UK vulnerable and isolated. This perspective contrasts sharply with the views of populist factions that advocate for a diminished role in international agreements, framing adherence to international law as an outdated relic.

Hermer's robust defence of international treaties also comes in light of recent criticisms regarding his handling of various diplomatic matters, including the return of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius. His critics, such as Labour peer Lord Maurice Glasman, have called for his resignation, arguing that his legalistic approach prioritises international law over pragmatic political solutions. Nevertheless, Hermer has found support among prominent figures, including Labour leader Keir Starmer, who has reiterated the party's commitment to the ECHR and the rule of law.

The trajectory of Hermer's tenure as Attorney General, characterised by a focus on both maintaining international obligations and addressing pressing domestic issues such as immigration and the legal ramifications of the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict, illustrates the complexities faced by the current government. In his efforts to align Britain's legal framework with evolving global standards, Hermer seeks to restore the UK’s reputation as a steward of the rule of law—a task that, while fraught with political tension, is deemed critical for the nation’s future stability and influence on the world stage.

As political factions grapple with differing visions of Britain’s identity and commitments, the debate surrounding the UK's role in international law remains a critical issue. Hermer’s stance not only evokes historical caution but also highlights the imperative of upholding legal agreements that underpin a stable and just world order—one where the lessons of the past are conscientiously remembered and respected.

Reference Map:

Source: Noah Wire Services