I am pleased to see (Journal, July 6) that King Arthur will be making his distinctive contribution to the 2024 election.

I imagine that he would agree with me about the veiled threat to our traditional liberty which has recently, however quietly, emerged.

We learn from the national press that there are certain extreme elements in the current government in favour of the UK’s withdrawal from the European Convention of Human Rights, even to the extent of a referendum on the matter.

They may be depending on the knee-jerk voter who will react negatively to a European anything, however, are the electorate to be presented with an option referring to a document which many of them will not have read, let alone studied?

I myself was one of that number until recently, but can now affirm the fundamental human rights enshrined in this document, which should never be set aside for any reason, and which have resounding historical precedent.

The “right to life with which it opens recalls at once the noble Preface to the US Declaration of Independence, while elsewhere there are several echoes of early Amendments to the US Constitution, such as the prohibition of torture, the right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence, which will also be found in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man.

Freedom of thought, conscience and religion are similarly echoed in the First Amendment and the Declaration.

To come closer to home. The right to privacy, peaceful enjoyment of possessions and freedom from unlawful restraint can be traced back to the 1628 Petition of Right, presented to Charles I in the era of forced loans and ship money, and still further back to Magna Carta and the “disseises” which King John was too apt to enforce.

In addition, two easily overlooked “Protocols” of the Convention concern the treatment of resident foreigners, which I suspect certain elements among the powers that be would rather have us do without - or, better still, not know about, especially as it is now official that we are not a welcoming country.

Remember: the initiative to set aside the Convention has been proposed not only because “stop the boats” is simply not happening, but chiefly to make more possible the costly and inhumane deportation of fellow humans to Rwanda, of all places. Does no-one recall the genocide?

While this is not, of course, a specifically local matter, it should concern every reader who has a vote.

Besides, we have our own special link with Magna Carta.

Richard Merwood
Wain-a-Long Road, Salisbury