Attorney General forced to apologise after comparing Tory and Reform calls to leave European Convention on Human Rights to 1930s Germany in controversial speech
Sir Keir Starmer is facing mounting pressure to sack his Attorney General Lord Hermer after the government’s top legal adviser compared calls to leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to the rise of Nazi Germany, sparking furious backlash from opposition parties.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch led the charge, demanding the Prime Minister show “backbone” and dismiss Lord Hermer, whom she accused of “calling people who disagree with him Nazis” and demonstrating “appalling judgment time and again.”
The Controversial Speech
The controversy erupted following Lord Hermer’s speech at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) defence think tank on Thursday, May 29, where he drew parallels between current political rhetoric and 1930s Germany.
In his address, Lord Hermer stated: “The claim that international law is fine as far as it goes, but can be put aside when conditions change, is a claim that was made in the early 1930s by ‘realist’ jurists in Germany, most notably Carl Schmitt, whose central thesis was in essence the claim that state power is all that counts, not law.
Schmitt was a controversial German jurist who joined the Nazi Party in 1933 and provided intellectual backing for the regime before later falling out of favor.
Lord Hermer continued: “Because of the experience of what followed 1933, far-sighted individuals rebuilt and transformed the institutions of international law, as well as internal constitutional law.”
The Attorney General specifically targeted what he called a “siren song” being heard “in the Palace of Westminster” calling for Britain to abandon “the constraints of international law in favour of raw power.
Swift and Furious Backlash
The comparison provoked immediate outrage from Reform UK and Conservative politicians, who viewed it as a direct attack on their positions regarding the ECHR.
Nigel Farage, Reform UK leader, told The Telegraph: “It is disgraceful that Lord Hermer should compare the growing campaign for national sovereignty and freedom from outdated international courts with 1930s Germany. Our national interest is being damaged by dangerous young men crossing the channel and the absurd surrender of the Chagos Islands. Hermer and Starmer are out of touch with the British public and these insults will only strengthen our case.
Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick called it an “appalling” and “disgusting smear,” stating: “David Lammy tried that disgusting smear with Brexiteers and it didn’t work for him. It won’t work for Hermer either.”
In a scathing statement, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch went further than her colleagues, calling for Lord Hermer’s immediate dismissal:
From refusing to fight the case against Kneecap, to advising the government to hand over £30 billion and our territory in the Chagos Islands, Lord Hermer has shown appalling judgment time and again. Now he’s calling people who disagree with him Nazis.
“This isn’t just embarrassing, it’s dangerous. Hermer doesn’t understand government. He believes in the rule of lawyers, not the rule of law.
If Keir Starmer had any backbone, he’d sack him. But will he risk upsetting his old friend and former donor? I doubt it.”
The reference to Lord Hermer as a “former donor” highlights the personal connection between the Attorney General and the Prime Minister, both of whom worked together as human rights lawyers before entering politics.
Forced Apology
Facing intense criticism, Lord Hermer was forced to issue an apology through a spokesman, who said: “The Attorney General gave a speech defending international law, which underpins our security, protects against threats from aggressive states like Russia and helps tackle organised immigration crime.
He rejects the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives. He acknowledges, though, that his choice of words was clumsy and regrets having used this reference.”
Government Defence
Despite the apology, some government ministers defended the substance of Lord Hermer’s argument. Education Minister Catherine McKinnell described it as a “quite thoughtful speech about international law” and backed the link between quitting the ECHR and dictators.
“I think any discussion around withdrawing from the international stage just supports people and the agenda of people like Putin,” McKinnell told Times Radio.
ECHR Debate Context
The controversy comes amid an intensifying debate about Britain’s membership of the ECHR. Both Reform UK and some Conservative MPs have called for withdrawal, citing cases where the convention has been used by illegal migrants and foreign criminals to avoid deportation.
The ECHR famously blocked the Conservative government’s first migrant deportation flight to Rwanda in 2022, with a single judge in Strasbourg granting an 11th-hour injunction.
While Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has stopped short of calling for immediate withdrawal, she has suggested the UK would have to leave if the convention prevents the country from doing “what is right.
Lord Hermer’s Controversial Tenure
Lord Hermer’s time as Attorney General has been marked by several controversies. A longtime human rights lawyer and friend of Sir Keir Starmer, he was elevated to the House of Lords specifically to take up the role.
Critics have highlighted his past work representing clients against the British state, including Gerry Adams, and his focus on prioritizing international law commitments. His involvement in the Chagos Islands deal and other decisions has made him one of the most controversial members of the cabinet.
Political Implications
The controversy highlights the growing divide in British politics over international law and sovereignty. With Reform UK making ECHR withdrawal a central policy and the Conservatives increasingly skeptical of international constraints, Lord Hermer’s comments have inflamed an already heated debate.
As one Conservative spokesperson noted, it was “ironic” that Lord Hermer had said he hoped to “depolarise the debate” while “simultaneously calling everyone he disagreed with Nazis.
The incident has also reinforced perceptions that the Labour government, led by former human rights lawyer Sir Keir Starmer, is too closely aligned with the international legal establishment to take tough decisions on issues like immigration control.
With calls for his sacking growing louder and the Attorney General forced into a humiliating climbdown, the controversy represents another headache for a Prime Minister already facing multiple political challenges. Whether Starmer will stand by his “old friend” or bow to pressure remains to be seen, but the incident has undoubtedly damaged the government’s attempts to appear tough on border control while maintaining its commitment to international law.
