Jurisdiction of the Court / Interpretation (Article 32)
12. The Court authoritatively interprets the Convention in accordance with relevant norms and principles of public international law, and, in particular, in the light of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The Convention is interpreted as a living instrument, giving appropriate consideration to present- day conditions, which ensures its applicability in response to novel challenges.
Article 3
22. It must be emphasised that the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under Article 3 of the Convention is absolute. It permits no derogation, contains no exceptions, and allows for no legitimate interference.
Article 8
31. Article 8 allows public authorities to expel a foreign national from their territory even though such a measure may interfere with their right to respect for private and family life, so long as such interference is in accordance with the law and necessary in a democratic society in pursuit of a legitimate aim. Legitimate aims that may justify interference are national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, the prevention of disorder or crime, the protection of health or morals, or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. The right balance must be struck between individual rights and interests and the weighty public interests of defending freedom and security in the societies of the States Parties.
t.o.
t.o. er den europæiske menneskerettighedsdomstol ikke en stor hindring for udvisninger af kriminelle udlændingen. Faktisk taber Danmark meget få sager ved EMD. I perioden 2019-2024 er 6721 udlændinge blevet udvist ved dom. Og medlemslandene i Europarådets 46 stater har en bred margin for at udvise kriminelle.
Eva Sevrin forklarer her bl.a. hvor få sager det drejer sig om, hvor EMD hindrer udvisninger
- 8.5.26 Podcast on Migration and the ECtHR med Eva Sevrin (universities of Ghent and Leuven) The European Court of Human Rights has come under growing political pressure, with some political leaders claiming that its case law on migration should be “rebalanced” because it protects “the wrong people”. Not everyone embraces that rhetoric, but it is no longer coming only from the political fringes. This May, the 46 Member States of the Council of Europe are expected to adopt a joint political declaration on migration and the European Convention on Human Rights. In this episode, I speak with Eva Sevrin, a researcher at Ghent University and the KU Leuven Center for Public Law who specializes in migration and human rights law. We focus on a simple question that often gets lost in the debate: what does the Court's case law actually say?
REAKTIONER ANALYSER kommer her
21.5.26 ECHR Reform is Here!: Reflections on the Chişinǎu Declaration and UK’s role in the process
“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.
Today’s declaration by the Council of Europe Ministers is an important step to promote people’s safety and fundamental rights. It strengthens our approach to a fair and firm migration policy in Europe. Migration is a shared challenge that requires shared solutions. That is why the Commission is actively contributing to the discussion at all levels – at the UN, the Council of Europe, and within the EU.
Former Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption said a similar declaration agreed in Brighton in 2012, aimed at reining in the power of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, which oversees the Convention, made ‘absolutely no practical difference’ and that ‘past experience suggests political declarations don’t get very far’.
Speaking to the BBC, he added: ‘I would expect judges deciding immigration and human rights cases generally to have regards to political declarations.
‘But ultimately, what binds them is the case law of the Strasbourg court and they’re not going to drift very far from that…Articles 3 and 8 are deeply embedded in its case law, and therefore extremely difficult to get rid of.’
THOMAS GAMMELTOFT-HANSEN, PROFESSOR I FLYGTNINGE- OG MIGRATIONSRETMen ifølge professoren så er der som udgangspunkt ingen vej uden om de grundlæggende konventionsforpligtelser. Heller ikke, hvis man opretter udrejsecentre i tredjelande, hvilket erklæringen muliggør, og rykker folk væk fra for eksempel dansk territorium.
The Commissioner told ministers in Chişinău that:
🚨 the “extraordinary achievement of the modern-day human rights legal system is … fragile”.
🚨 He urged states to “insist on the universality of human rights”, as well as on the independence of the Court and of national courts.
🚨 He added that states should “resolve never to instrumentalise human rights standards or institutions in the pursuit of policy goals, including policy goals in the context of migration management”.
https://lnkd.in/e9SrxjD4
"This is a political declaration and, legally speaking, does not alter the Convention or the obligations of States under it. The point of the declaration is to lean on the European Court of Human Rights and, indirectly, on domestic courts to interpret the Convention in a way that States consider to be more aligned with their priorities. The specific political goal is to reduce human rights barriers to removing foreign nationals, even if there is a real risk of harm to them on return.
The declaration is not legally binding, but it does put the Court in Strasbourg under significant pressure to apply the law more restrictively in asylum and immigration cases. There are questions about the propriety of this sort of political pressure being exerted on Courts by States generally. From a human rights law perspective, what is most controversial is the attempt to reduce protection against ill-treatment for foreign nationals, because this undermines the cardinal principles of universality of human rights and equality before the law, and risks eroding in practice what has always been an absolute right.
Nicola Canestrini's post The Declaration is soft law. It does not amend the Convention. But it is precisely through such texts that intergovernmental pressure is exerted on Strasbourg, ...
15.5.26 Dozens of European nations sign off on new interpretation of rights convention in migration cases Washington Post
15.5.26 New Council of Europe declaration clarifies ECHR interpretation in immigration and asylum law EIN
UK Government says declaration will help ensure serious criminals are not able to use courts to frustrate deportation process
Political statement agreed by all 46 Council of Europe states could give them more leeway to carry out deportations
»Det er i virkeligheden et lille juridisk problem, som er blevet gjort til et stort politisk problem, for hvis kriminaliteten er grov nok, og folk har fået en advarsel, og man har fulgt domstolens praksis, så er det relativt let at udvise folk«.
15.5. 25 Europe ‘clarifies’ how human rights apply to migrants in bid to stave off populists Politico
Alain Berset, secretary general of the Council of Europe, which oversees the treaty, said the declaration would help “guide our own work as well as that of national authorities and domestic courts.”
He told POLITICO after the meeting: “What is seen as a migration concern in Denmark is not the same thing as what is seen as a migration issue in Italy, and it is not the same as what is seen as a migration issue in the Baltic states, with high grade threats at the border.
For et år siden startede statsminister Mette Frederiksen et opgør med Menneskerettighedsdomstolens håndtering af udlændingesager. Nu er Europarådets 46 lande enige om ny erklæring. Et eksempel på, at Danmark ”godt kan udfordre konventionerne indefra”, lyder det fra Lars Løkke Rasmussen, selv om erklæringen ikke er bindende.
15.5.26 Shopping Lists and Steppingstones
On the Chișinău Declaration by Fikfak og Rask Madsen
15.5.26 46 europæiske lande har fredag i Chisinau i Moldova vedtaget en politisk erklæring om migration.
Dansk pres har båret frugt: 46 lande vil gøre det lettere at udvise kriminelle udlændinge
Ritzau 15.5.26Council of Europe members plan to change interpretation of ECHR to make it easier to deport refused asylum seekers
