Photo credit: AP News
As sympathy for immigrants erodes around the world, European nations agreed on Wednesday to consider changes that rights advocates say would weaken migrant protections that have underpinned European law since WWII.
The AP reports that the consensus coalesced as mainstream political parties across Europe have adopted tougher migration policies as a way to blunt the momentum of far-right politicians exploiting discontent over immigration, even though illegal border crossings are actually falling.
Members of the Council of Europe acknowledged “challenges” posed by migration while reaffirming their respect for the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights, the Council’s secretary general, Alain Berset, told journalists after discussions in Strasbourg, France.
The convention and the court, which handles complaints against the council, have been increasingly criticized by some member states, including Italy, Denmark and the United Kingdom. They argue that they are too limited in how far they can go to tackle illegal migration and deport migrants who commit crimes.
Ministers of the 46 member countries will now begin debating a political declaration on migration to be adopted in May, as well as a new recommendation to deter human smuggling, Berset added.
The council, which is not a European Union institution, was set up in the wake of WWII to promote peace and democracy.
Discussions over the need to reform lor reinterpret the convention as it relates to migrants began last year after nine nations signed a letter attempting to curtail the power of the court, the council’s independent legal team.
The group of nations argued that the court’s interpretation of rights and obligations prevented them from expelling migrants who commit crimes and keeping their countries safe. Berset defended the court’s independence at the time, but support for a tougher stance has only grown.
While Berset sought to downplay the division, 27 nations signed a separate statement on Wednesday calling for a less restrictive interpretation of the law, echoing the arguments made last year.
Andrew Forde, co-founder of the AGORA group of academics, researchers and lawyers, said Wednesday’s conclusions and the statement signed by two-thirds of the members clearly showed that the majority of governments supported a more conservative understanding of the convention based on political interests.
Meanwhile, the prime ministers of Denmark and the UK published an op-ed in The Guardian newspaper on Tuesday, calling for tighter immigration controls to deny entry to those seeking better economic opportunities as opposed to those fleeing conflict.
