European Leaders Demand ECHR Reform to Regain Control Over Migration Policies

[Social Media]

 

European Leaders Demand ECHR Reform to Regain Control Over Migration Policies

 

A growing coalition of European leaders is calling for reforms to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), arguing that it is preventing nations from protecting their borders and effectively managing migration. Led by Italy and Denmark, a group of eight countries has issued an open letter demanding greater national autonomy in expelling criminal migrants and enforcing stricter asylum policies.

 

 

The letter, also signed by Poland, Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and the Czech Republic, expresses deep frustration with how the ECHR has interpreted the 1953 European Convention on Human Rights. It states, “We have seen cases concerning the expulsion of criminal foreign nationals, where the interpretation of the convention has resulted in the protection of the wrong people and posed too many limitations on the states’ ability to decide whom to expel from their territories.”

 

 

At a joint press conference in Rome, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen emphasized that their citizens are losing faith in the ability of governments to manage immigration. “We don’t have much time, in almost all European countries people believe the situation is out of control,” said Frederiksen. Meloni added that the time had come for a “courageous reflection” on the convention, stressing that it has led to scenarios “when the convention is applied and states are not allowed to protect citizens by expelling immigrants accused of serious crimes.”

 

While the letter acknowledges the positive contributions of many migrants who have embraced European values and integrated into society, it also warns about the emergence of “parallel societies.” It states, “Others have come and chosen not to integrate, isolating themselves in parallel societies and distancing themselves from our fundamental values of equality, democracy and freedom.”

 

The letter further argues that although the principles enshrined in the European Convention are timeless, the current scale of global migration requires new approaches. “The world has changed fundamentally since many of our ideas were conceived in the ashes of the great wars. The ideas themselves are universal and everlasting. However, we now live in a globalised world where people migrate across borders on a completely different scale. What was once right might not be the answer of tomorrow.”

 

The European Court of Human Rights has recently been at the centre of several high-profile cases that have angered national governments. It has ruled against Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland over their treatment of migrants and has pressured Denmark to relax restrictions on family reunification for migrants. In Italy, a court blocked Meloni’s plan to create a migrant processing centre in Albania, a case that has now been referred to the European Court of Justice. In the UK, the ECHR prevented the first flight carrying asylum seekers to Rwanda as part of a controversial offshore asylum processing plan.

 

In response to what they see as external interference in national migration policies, the signatories of the letter are calling for “more room” for national decision-making, particularly in light of what they describe as the “instrumentalisation” of migration by hostile states like Russia and Belarus. These countries have been accused of deliberately directing migrant flows toward EU borders as a form of geopolitical pressure. Poland, for example, suspended the right to claim asylum at parts of its border in response to a surge in migrant crossings.

 

The letter concludes with a warning and a commitment: “We have to restore the right balance. And our countries will co-operate to further this ambition. Although our aim is to safeguard our democracies, we will likely be accused of the opposite.”

 

This push comes as tighter controls across the continent have already led to a 38 per cent drop in irregular border crossings into the EU last year, with 239,000 cases detected, according to the EU’s border agency, Frontex. In a symbolic shift, Germany recently reversed the 2015 policy under Angela Merkel that allowed hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers into the country—a move widely seen as a catalyst for mass migration to Europe.

 

Merkel, however, has defended her decisions, warning that unilateral actions by EU members could threaten the Schengen zone. “Otherwise Europe could be destroyed,” she said at a recent public event, calling instead for a unified strategy to secure the EU’s external borders.

 

As the debate intensifies, the future role of the ECHR in shaping European migration policy hangs in the balance, with growing pressure from national governments to reclaim authority over who can stay—and who must go.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times  2025-05-26

 

 

[The Cyclist]

Get real

 

The EHCR isn't going to reform, until Countries start withdrawing from it.

[JonnyF]

4 hours ago, Social Media said:

Meloni added that the time had come for a “courageous reflection” on the convention, stressing that it has led to scenarios “when the convention is applied and states are not allowed to protect citizens by expelling immigrants accused of serious crimes.”

 

Don't get too courageous Giorgia - or I can see a ban from politics in your not too distant future like the other right wing leaders they are removing one by one.

[newbee2022]

4 hours ago, Social Media said:

 

European Leaders Demand ECHR Reform to Regain Control Over Migration Policies

 

A growing coalition of European leaders is calling for reforms to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), arguing that it is preventing nations from protecting their borders and effectively managing migration. Led by Italy and Denmark, a group of eight countries has issued an open letter demanding greater national autonomy in expelling criminal migrants and enforcing stricter asylum policies.

 

 

The letter, also signed by Poland, Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and the Czech Republic, expresses deep frustration with how the ECHR has interpreted the 1953 European Convention on Human Rights. It states, “We have seen cases concerning the expulsion of criminal foreign nationals, where the interpretation of the convention has resulted in the protection of the wrong people and posed too many limitations on the states’ ability to decide whom to expel from their territories.”

 

 

At a joint press conference in Rome, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen emphasized that their citizens are losing faith in the ability of governments to manage immigration. “We don’t have much time, in almost all European countries people believe the situation is out of control,” said Frederiksen. Meloni added that the time had come for a “courageous reflection” on the convention, stressing that it has led to scenarios “when the convention is applied and states are not allowed to protect citizens by expelling immigrants accused of serious crimes.”

 

While the letter acknowledges the positive contributions of many migrants who have embraced European values and integrated into society, it also warns about the emergence of “parallel societies.” It states, “Others have come and chosen not to integrate, isolating themselves in parallel societies and distancing themselves from our fundamental values of equality, democracy and freedom.”

 

The letter further argues that although the principles enshrined in the European Convention are timeless, the current scale of global migration requires new approaches. “The world has changed fundamentally since many of our ideas were conceived in the ashes of the great wars. The ideas themselves are universal and everlasting. However, we now live in a globalised world where people migrate across borders on a completely different scale. What was once right might not be the answer of tomorrow.”

 

The European Court of Human Rights has recently been at the centre of several high-profile cases that have angered national governments. It has ruled against Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland over their treatment of migrants and has pressured Denmark to relax restrictions on family reunification for migrants. In Italy, a court blocked Meloni’s plan to create a migrant processing centre in Albania, a case that has now been referred to the European Court of Justice. In the UK, the ECHR prevented the first flight carrying asylum seekers to Rwanda as part of a controversial offshore asylum processing plan.

 

In response to what they see as external interference in national migration policies, the signatories of the letter are calling for “more room” for national decision-making, particularly in light of what they describe as the “instrumentalisation” of migration by hostile states like Russia and Belarus. These countries have been accused of deliberately directing migrant flows toward EU borders as a form of geopolitical pressure. Poland, for example, suspended the right to claim asylum at parts of its border in response to a surge in migrant crossings.

 

The letter concludes with a warning and a commitment: “We have to restore the right balance. And our countries will co-operate to further this ambition. Although our aim is to safeguard our democracies, we will likely be accused of the opposite.”

 

This push comes as tighter controls across the continent have already led to a 38 per cent drop in irregular border crossings into the EU last year, with 239,000 cases detected, according to the EU’s border agency, Frontex. In a symbolic shift, Germany recently reversed the 2015 policy under Angela Merkel that allowed hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers into the country—a move widely seen as a catalyst for mass migration to Europe.

 

Merkel, however, has defended her decisions, warning that unilateral actions by EU members could threaten the Schengen zone. “Otherwise Europe could be destroyed,” she said at a recent public event, calling instead for a unified strategy to secure the EU’s external borders.

 

As the debate intensifies, the future role of the ECHR in shaping European migration policy hangs in the balance, with growing pressure from national governments to reclaim authority over who can stay—and who must go.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times  2025-05-26

 

 

Good move, hopefully very soon.

[FlorC]

10 years too little too late.

[newbee2022]

4 hours ago, Social Media said:

 

European Leaders Demand ECHR Reform to Regain Control Over Migration Policies

 

A growing coalition of European leaders is calling for reforms to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), arguing that it is preventing nations from protecting their borders and effectively managing migration. Led by Italy and Denmark, a group of eight countries has issued an open letter demanding greater national autonomy in expelling criminal migrants and enforcing stricter asylum policies.

 

 

The letter, also signed by Poland, Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and the Czech Republic, expresses deep frustration with how the ECHR has interpreted the 1953 European Convention on Human Rights. It states, “We have seen cases concerning the expulsion of criminal foreign nationals, where the interpretation of the convention has resulted in the protection of the wrong people and posed too many limitations on the states’ ability to decide whom to expel from their territories.”

 

 

At a joint press conference in Rome, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen emphasized that their citizens are losing faith in the ability of governments to manage immigration. “We don’t have much time, in almost all European countries people believe the situation is out of control,” said Frederiksen. Meloni added that the time had come for a “courageous reflection” on the convention, stressing that it has led to scenarios “when the convention is applied and states are not allowed to protect citizens by expelling immigrants accused of serious crimes.”

 

While the letter acknowledges the positive contributions of many migrants who have embraced European values and integrated into society, it also warns about the emergence of “parallel societies.” It states, “Others have come and chosen not to integrate, isolating themselves in parallel societies and distancing themselves from our fundamental values of equality, democracy and freedom.”

 

The letter further argues that although the principles enshrined in the European Convention are timeless, the current scale of global migration requires new approaches. “The world has changed fundamentally since many of our ideas were conceived in the ashes of the great wars. The ideas themselves are universal and everlasting. However, we now live in a globalised world where people migrate across borders on a completely different scale. What was once right might not be the answer of tomorrow.”

 

The European Court of Human Rights has recently been at the centre of several high-profile cases that have angered national governments. It has ruled against Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland over their treatment of migrants and has pressured Denmark to relax restrictions on family reunification for migrants. In Italy, a court blocked Meloni’s plan to create a migrant processing centre in Albania, a case that has now been referred to the European Court of Justice. In the UK, the ECHR prevented the first flight carrying asylum seekers to Rwanda as part of a controversial offshore asylum processing plan.

 

In response to what they see as external interference in national migration policies, the signatories of the letter are calling for “more room” for national decision-making, particularly in light of what they describe as the “instrumentalisation” of migration by hostile states like Russia and Belarus. These countries have been accused of deliberately directing migrant flows toward EU borders as a form of geopolitical pressure. Poland, for example, suspended the right to claim asylum at parts of its border in response to a surge in migrant crossings.

 

The letter concludes with a warning and a commitment: “We have to restore the right balance. And our countries will co-operate to further this ambition. Although our aim is to safeguard our democracies, we will likely be accused of the opposite.”

 

This push comes as tighter controls across the continent have already led to a 38 per cent drop in irregular border crossings into the EU last year, with 239,000 cases detected, according to the EU’s border agency, Frontex. In a symbolic shift, Germany recently reversed the 2015 policy under Angela Merkel that allowed hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers into the country—a move widely seen as a catalyst for mass migration to Europe.

 

Merkel, however, has defended her decisions, warning that unilateral actions by EU members could threaten the Schengen zone. “Otherwise Europe could be destroyed,” she said at a recent public event, calling instead for a unified strategy to secure the EU’s external borders.

 

As the debate intensifies, the future role of the ECHR in shaping European migration policy hangs in the balance, with growing pressure from national governments to reclaim authority over who can stay—and who must go.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Times  2025-05-26

 

 

I'm confused....

Economic immigrants from Germany? And then going to Poland?

I didn't know that Poland is the country of milk and honey.

Something is going on.😳

[jippytum]

Unfortunately current leaders like Starmer  a staunch supporter of the ECHR  will realise too little too late that allowing convicted illegal  criminals to avoid deportation for trivial reasons is a nonsense. 

[The Cyclist]

54 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

I'm confused....

Economic immigrants from Germany? And then going to Poland?

I didn't know that Poland is the country of milk and honey.

Something is going on.😳

 

Yes, It easy to be confused

 

Now try thinking of newly minted Germans getting moved on, in great schemes like " Youth mobility Schemes " and it all becomes clear.

[impulse]

Won't be long before Christian and Jewish (and atheist) Europeans are seeking refuge in the US, Canada, Greenland and Australia.  Maybe even Russia.

 

[FlorC]

44 minutes ago, impulse said:

Won't be long before Christian and Jewish (and atheist) Europeans are seeking refuge in the US, Canada, Greenland and Australia.  Maybe even Russia.

 

Putin is way ahead :

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024/08/19/putin-signs-decree-granting-residency-to-foreigners-who-share-traditional-russian-values-a86074

 

I'm dreaming of a nice cottage somewhere quiet like Siberia ,

but lazada won't deliver there . 🤨

[digger70]

European Leaders Demand ECHR Reform to Regain Control Over Migration Policies

 why are the countries listening to the ECHR anyway , Are they Forced to comply what the ECHR says .

If the countries are in a agreement . Cancel the agreement if they like it or not and close the borders , if one country start doing that others will follow soon and it will be for the better .

The whole of Europe and UK are run over by the Asylum seekers and and non registered Foreigners .Get rid of the ,Send them back home .

[Red Forever]

4 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Yes, It easy to be confused

 

Now try thinking of newly minted Germans getting moved on, in great schemes like " Youth mobility Schemes " and it all becomes clear.

Wow Q Anon or what!?

[The Cyclist]

Just now, Red Forever said:

Wow Q Anon or what!?

 

No, The Cyclist 26 May 2025.

 

I have a couple of bridges for sale, if you think it is not going to be newly minted Germans that take advantage of any of these madcap schemes.