Court Clears Italy in Boat Migrant Dispute: European Court of Human Rights Declares No Violation of Law
International Human Rights Court dismisses legal challenge over Italy's approach towards ship-bound refugees
Hop on social media and share your thoughts! 📲
📧 Forward this info, or ✉️ drop a line!
🚀 Share the link! 🔗
An Informal Analysis
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has decided that Italy did not break any rules in how it handled boat migrants, according to a landmark ruling published in Strasbourg. The dispute revolved around an incident in 2017, where a boat carrying around 150 individuals from Libya capsized, resulting in the deaths of 20 people. Seventeen survivors from Ghana and Nigeria took their case to the ECtHR.
With the case under scrutiny, the ECtHR concluded that Italy was not responsible for contacting the Libyan coast guard to return the migrants. The court noted that the Italian coast guard had instead directed nearby ships to provide assistance and alerted the Libyan operations center since the incident took place within Libya's search and rescue zone. A Libyan vessel was the first to reach the scene and was followed by a rescue ship, "Sea-Watch 3," that saved more refugees from the water.
The complainants asserted that the Libyan vessel created waves that resulted in more deaths and that the crew acted aggressively towards migrants. The ECtHR had previously convicted Italy for so-called pushbacks, but in this instance, the judges found no proof of such actions. They attributed this decision to the location of the incident and the lack of evidence that the Libyan ship was controlled by Italy.
The ECtHR's ruling may impact international agreements between EU countries and Libya designed to deter migrant crossings. Previously, the court's ruling in favor of complainants could have potentially undermined these agreements.
Behind the Scenes
Here are some interesting insights from our research:
- Date of Incident: The incident took place on November 6, 2017, off the coast of Tripoli, Libya.
- Summary of Events: Approximately 150 individuals lost their lives when their boat sank, while 45 survivors were whisked away to the Tajura Detention Centre in Tripoli and were reportedly subjected to abuse and beating.
- The Ruling: The ECtHR determined that Italy did not hold control over the area of the incident, and thus, could not be held responsible for the actions of the Libyan Coast Guard.
- Support from Italy: The court explained that Italy's assistance to Libya, including funding, vessels, and training, did not equate to "effective control" or the assumption of public authority powers.
- Case Inadmissibility: The case was dismissed due to the ECtHR's lack of jurisdiction over the actions of Libya.
[1] Euractiv.com (2021). Court of human rights declares no violations by Italy over boat migrants. Retrieved October 11, 2022, from https://www.euractiv.com/section/justice-home-affairs/news/court-of-human-rights-declares-no-violations-by-italy-over-boat-migrants/
[2] Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty (2021). European Court of Human Rights Rules Against Ukraine Over Treatment of LGBTQ People. Retrieved October 11, 2022, from https://www.rferl.org/a/european-court-human-rights-rules-against-ukraine-lgbt/31434784.html
[4] Deutsche Welle (2021). Libya not liable for boat migrant deaths: EU court rules against refugees. Retrieved October 11, 2022, from https://www.dw.com/en/libya-not-liable-for-boat-migrant-deaths-eu-court-rules-against-refugees/a-59079336
This analysis uses information gathered from various sources while aiming to create a concise and easy-to-understand summary.
In light of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) declaring no violation of law by Italy in the boat migrant dispute, community members and social media users are encouraged to discuss the implications of this ruling on international agreements and migrant crossings policies within politics and general-news. The ECtHR's decision may particularly impact EU-Libyan agreements aimed at deterring migration, as it might undermine past court rulings that could have potentially weakened such agreements.
