European nations, with Denmark at the forefront, are advocating for a reevaluation of the European Convention on Human Rights
Nine European Union nations, including Denmark, Italy, and Poland, have issued a joint letter asking for a reconsideration of how the European Convention on Human Rights is applied, particularly in the context of migration. The appeal comes as the countries feel their ability to enforce immigration laws is hindered by the current interpretation by the European Court of Human Rights.
Dubbed for "a new and open-minded conversation about the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights," the open letter, shared by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's office, highlights the urgent need to restore balance in the implementation of the agreement.
Throughout history, the European Convention on Human Rights has guaranteed fundamental rights such as the right to life, freedom of expression, and the prohibition of slavery, torture, and discrimination. Its provisions, which have been in place since 1953, should be adhered to by the 46 countries associated with the convention—including all 27 EU member states. The European Court of Human Rights serves to issue binding rulings on interpretation and application.
As public sentiment regarding migration shifts, extreme-right political gains have materialized in several EU nations. This shift has in turn amplified pressure on governments to tighten immigration policies. The open letter was made public following a meeting in Rome between Meloni and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, two leaders who have both articulated firm stances on immigration.
The letter was also signed by the heads of Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Czech Republic, and Poland.
Last year saw a 38% decrease in irregular border crossings into the EU, reaching 239,000—a drop off from an almost 10-year peak in 2023, according to the EU border agency Frontex. Despite this decrease, EU leaders, led by countries like Italy and Denmark, have urged for urgent new legislation to streamline deportations and counter irregular migration.
The signatories assert that it is time to scrutinize how the international conventions address contemporary challenges and to review the European Court of Human Rights' interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights. They have also taken issue with the Court in cases concerning alleged unlawful treatment of migrants, with Denmark being ordered to amend its family reunification rules, and Italy enduring numerous rulings against its treatment of migrants.
The states express concern that the Court may have overextended the scope of the Convention in some instances, potentially undermining the decision-making power of national governments. They believe this shift in interpretation has limited their abilities to safeguard public security and uphold the rule of law within their democracies.
Although the letter does not include the UK as a signatory, the nation faced similar issues when the European Court of Human Rights challenged its plan to deport migrants to Rwanda.
- The joint letter, signed by nine European Union nations, calls for a reevaluation of the European Convention on Human Rights' application, particularly in immigration matters, echoing growing public sentiments and political shifts.
- In the realm of general news, the states expressed their concern that the European Court of Human Rights may have overstepped its boundaries by extending the scope of the Convention, thereby limiting their powers to ensure public security and uphold the rule of law.
- parallel to the ongoing debates about migration and politics within the EU, the signatories, including Denmark and Italy, appealed for a fresh conversation on the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights in the context of contemporary challenges, such as irregular migration.
