On 15 May, representatives from 46 nations across Europe and beyond convened to establish a new interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights in the context of migration cases. This interpretation addresses the contentious deployment of deportation centres in third countries.
The political declaration was a response to requests from several member states advocating for more stringent measures to address irregular migration and streamline deportation processes. However, various human rights organisations have raised concerns regarding this declaration, contending that it may weaken protections against torture and diminish Europe’s commitment to safeguarding human rights for migrants.
“The declaration underlines that states have the undeniable sovereign right to control the entry and residence of foreign nationals, and that it is both an obligation and a necessity for states to protect their borders in compliance with the Convention,” the Council of Europe (CoE) said in a statement after the non-binding declaration was adopted all of its 46 members’ foreign ministers Friday at a meeting in Chisinau, the Moldovan capital.
The statement states that nations experiencing significant migrant influxes may consider implementing new strategies to address irregular migration. These strategies could include establishing “third country return hubs” and enhancing collaboration with transit countries.
It is important to note that the Council oversees the European Court of Human Rights, the premier judicial body responsible for safeguarding human rights across the continent.
Nevertheless, Chiara Catelli, spokesperson for the Brussels-based rights organisation PICUM, has expressed concern that this declaration may pose risks to both the court and the integrity of the convention.
“Governments are effectively seeking to pressure an independent Court into weakening long-established human rights protections in order to facilitate deportations, with the risk of deporting people where they could face torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, or where they would stop receiving life-saving medical care,” she said.
“A two-tier human rights system based on migration status is an affront to the basic principle that human rights are universal,” said Eve Geddie, director of Amnesty International’s European Institutions Office.
Italy became the first EU country to send several dozen rejected migrants to a “return hub” in Albania last year, as these individuals had no permission to stay in Italy. Rights advocates criticised the move as inhumane, comparing it to US President Donald Trump‘s deportation policies.
In 2024, the EU tightened migration policies following the rise of right-wing parties in several member states. Leaders from nine countries—Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland—signed a letter arguing that the European Convention on Human Rights limited their ability to expel foreign criminals. They claimed that the court’s interpretation has protected the wrong individuals and constrained expulsion decisions.
EU Migration Commissioner Magnus Brunner called the declaration “an important step” towards a unified migration policy.
“It strengthens our approach to a fair and firm migration policy in Europe. Migration is a shared challenge that requires shared solutions,” he said.
After the declaration was signed, the CoE’s Secretary General Alain Berset said the Chisinau Declaration “will help to guide our own work as well as that of national authorities and domestic courts.”
This article used information from The Associated Press.
