Activist judges granting asylum receive backing from a prominent Belgian legal figure
In a move that has sparked controversy, the governments of nine EU countries have accused the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) of undermining the national security of member states and prioritizing the individual rights of asylum migrants with its recent rulings.
This criticism is a continuation of an earlier open letter signed by Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Austria, and Hungary. The governments argue that the ECHR's judgments interfere with national sovereignty and asylum policies, and they advocate for revising key asylum laws to regain control over border protection and immigration processes.
The legal opinion supporting this stance was penned by Marc Bossuyt, a former President of the Belgian Constitutional Court. Bossuyt encourages the addressed countries to consider amendments to the Schengen Agreement on free movement and advocates for stricter asylum regulations within existing law.
Bossuyt's opinion was commissioned by the office of Belgian right-wing Prime Minister Bart De Wever, who in 2016, as the mayor of Antwerp, criticized German Chancellor Angela Merkel's migration policy of open borders, calling it an "epochal mistake."
One of Bossuyt's key arguments is that more conservative judges are needed to achieve changes in EU asylum rules. He also points out that few judges at the ECHR in Strasbourg have been elected for their expertise in asylum issues.
Deportations to non-EU countries have reportedly been made increasingly difficult by courts, according to Bossuyt. He cites instances where courts cite allegedly inhumane conditions or degrading treatment in the return country, invoking Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, originally intended to prohibit torture.
The opinion was reportedly sent to around a dozen EU countries, including Germany, the Netherlands, and Greece. It was obtained by news portal "Euractiv" and dated August 10.
Notably, Bossuyt was surprised by De Wever's request to draft the legal opinion, marking the first time a high-ranking politician had supported his writings. The opinion has since become a frequently used reference by courts to define the obligation to provide for asylum seekers as an absolute condition.
This development marks a significant shift in the discourse surrounding asylum and immigration policies within the EU, with many countries seeking to reassert their control over these critical areas. The future implications of this critique and Bossuyt's legal opinion remain to be seen.
Read also:
- United States tariffs pose a threat to India, necessitating the recruitment of adept negotiators or strategists, similar to those who had influenced Trump's decisions.
- Weekly happenings in the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag)
- Southwest region's most popular posts, accompanied by an inquiry:
- Discussion between Putin and Trump in Alaska could potentially overshadow Ukraine's concerns
