Half of the judges currently serving on the European Court of Human Rights have never held adjudicating positions in the past, GB News can reveal.
Analysis carried out by this broadcaster highlights that 23 of the 46 serving judges do not have experience in the role in a lower court, while 11 have no courtroom experience as lawyers either.
Judges overseeing rulings include those who mainly have a background in academia, teaching, and promoting gender equality.
British politicians have described GB News' findings as "stunning", with some demanding a tightening of the rules for who can serve on the ECHR, while others have called for the UK to ignore all rulings made in Strasbourg.
Half of European human rights judges dictating to Britain have no former experience
Getty Images
According to her official ECHR biography, Judge Ivana Jelić of Montenegro found her way onto the powerful court after working as a Teaching Assistant and as a Gender Equality rapporteur promoting gender mainstreaming.
Gabriele Kucsko Stadlmayer, who joined the European Court of Human Rights in 2015, has no experience as either a lawyer or judge with his experience being primarily in the field of academia. He worked as a Professor of Constitutional & Administrative Law at the University of Vienna for four years before being appointed to the court.
Meanwhile, Judge Krzysztof Wojtyczek worked as a Professor in Krakow for a number of years before his elevation.
Ex-Home Office minister, Sarah Dines MP told GB News: "The European Court of Human Rights is a sham. It bears no resemblance whatsoever to the court the United Kingdom signed up to in the 1950s.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
Some 23 of the 46 serving judges do not have experience in the role in a lower court
ECHR
"It is best described as a human rights NGO masquerading as a court, staffed and run by human rights activists using this country to further woke policies that would never receive a democratic mandate."
Former Immigration Minister Kevin Foster added: "It is stunning to see this lack of judicial experience from a court which too often interferes with decisions made by UK Judges with many years of experience.
"It points to why the legitimacy of this court is often questioned."
GB News found some sitting judges come from a regulatory background such as Branko Lubarda who previously worked as a Member of the Scientific Community Forum for the Regulation of Social Europe.
The ECHR has found itself under increased pressure after a number of rulings against the UK Government
Getty Images
Even among the 23 judges who do have prior experience presiding over judgements, some only served in junior positions.
Judge Lorraine Schembri Orland's only former role in adjudicating over judgements was in Malta's Civil Court (Voluntary Jurisdiction Section). The country's judiciary states: "This court does not in principle hear and decide cases of a contentious nature."
Schembri Orland's CV indicates that her other former experiences prior to her appointment to the ECHR include working as an "Advisor on gender mainstreaming".
Former Leader of the House Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg MP said the lack of experience of some judges serving on the court was evidence that the ECHR was not a "serious" legal body.
"There is, therefore, no reason to respect it or to follow its judgements," he said.
Deputy Chairman of the European Research Group of Brexiteer Conservative MPs, David Jones added: "This simply underlines that the European Court of Human Rights should not have jurisdiction, whether direct or indirect, in the UK.
"British judges are highly trained and experienced and have more than enough knowledge to deal with human rights issues when they are raised.
"There should be no question of second-guessing their decisions by people with dubious qualifications."
The ECHR has found itself under increased pressure from politicians within Britain in recent years after a number of rulings against the UK Government.
Conservative MPs have become especially frustrated after the Government's Rwanda deportation plan was deemed to be incompatible with rulings from the European court.
Despite the criticism, the ECHR was defended by Senior Immigration Solicitor, Richard Bartram, who told GB News that the judges were "some of the finest legal minds in Europe".
"They are independent of the states that put them up for election. Sitting for non-renewable fixed terms they are beholden to no one," he said.
A spokesman for the ECHR told GB News: "Under Article 21(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, judges must be of high moral character and either possess the qualifications required for appointment to high judicial office or be jurisconsults of recognised competence.
"The latter category may include legal practitioners, senior academic lawyers, legal advisers or other government officials with relevant experience.
"The Court does not comment on a judge’s curriculum vitae."