Italy leads EU push to review European Convention on Human Rights

Key Takeaways

• On May 22, 2025, Italy and Denmark led nine EU countries in challenging ECtHR’s migration rulings.
• ECtHR rulings forced Denmark to end refugee family reunification waits and criticized Italy’s migrant returns to Libya.
• The open letter calls for reinterpreting the ECHR to restore national sovereignty over migration policies.

On May 22, 2025, Italy 🇮🇹 and Denmark led a group of nine European Union countries in publishing a bold open letter that challenges the current interpretation and application of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), especially as enforced by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). This move marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over migration, asylum policy, and national sovereignty within the EU. The letter, available on the Italian government’s official website, calls for a fundamental rethink of how the ECHR is used in migration cases, arguing that the ECtHR’s recent decisions have gone beyond the original intent of the Convention and now restrict the ability of national governments to manage sensitive issues like irregular migration.

Why Are Italy and Denmark Leading This Push?

Italy and Denmark have both faced recent ECtHR rulings that directly impacted their national migration policies. For example:

• The ECtHR ruled against Denmark, forcing it to abandon a three-year waiting period for family reunification for refugees.
• Italy was found to have mistreated migrants and was criticized for returning asylum seekers to Libya, a practice the court said violated human rights.

These rulings, according to the governments of Italy and Denmark, limit their ability to respond to the realities of migration pressures at their borders. Both countries argue that the ECtHR is interpreting the ECHR in ways that were not intended when the Convention was created in 1950, especially in the context of today’s complex migration challenges.

What Does the Open Letter Say?

The letter, signed by Italy, Denmark, Poland, and six other EU states (with more expected to join), states:
“The Convention should reflect the challenges of today. What was considered right in the past may no longer be applicable in current contexts.”

The signatories argue that the ECtHR’s expanded interpretation of the ECHR restricts national sovereignty and makes it harder for governments to manage migration and asylum in ways that reflect their own political and social realities.

Who Else Is Involved?

• Poland is a key supporter, aligning with Italy and Denmark in seeking stricter migration controls.
• Other countries such as Czechia, Finland, the Netherlands, Germany, France, Greece, Sweden, Hungary, and Slovakia are seen as potential future signatories, especially given their own recent disagreements with the ECtHR over asylum rulings.
• The letter remains open for additional EU states to sign, signaling a growing coalition.

Recent Policy Context: The EU Migration and Asylum Pact

This initiative comes on the heels of the EU Migration and Asylum Pact, adopted in May 2024. The Pact introduced:

• Stricter rules for asylum seekers
• Faster decision-making processes
• Increased use of detention at borders
• Easier procedures for deportations

The Pact itself was already a move towards tighter migration controls. The new push by Italy and Denmark is seen as an attempt to further limit the influence of the ECtHR on national migration policies, especially when court rulings conflict with these stricter rules.

How Does This Affect Asylum Seekers and Migrants?

If the coalition led by Italy and Denmark is successful, several practical changes could occur:

• Stricter asylum rules: Governments may feel empowered to tighten their asylum procedures even further.
• Faster deportations: There could be less judicial oversight, making it easier for states to remove people from their territory.
• Increased detention and pushbacks: More migrants could be detained at borders or pushed back before they can apply for asylum.
• Legal uncertainty: As national governments challenge or ignore ECtHR rulings, asylum seekers may face confusion about their rights and protections.

According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, these changes could make it much harder for vulnerable migrants and asylum seekers to find safety in Europe, increasing the risk of abuse and forced returns to dangerous situations.

The Role of the European Court of Human Rights

The European Court of Human Rights is the main body responsible for enforcing the ECHR. It hears cases brought by individuals or groups who claim their rights under the Convention have been violated by a member state. In recent years, the ECtHR has:

• Ruled against Denmark’s family reunification policy for refugees
• Found Italy responsible for mistreatment of migrants and for returning people to unsafe countries
• Issued decisions that expand the rights of migrants and asylum seekers, often clashing with national governments seeking stricter controls

Supporters of the ECtHR argue that its broad interpretation of the ECHR is necessary to protect vulnerable people, especially in times of political pressure. Critics, including the current coalition, say the court is overstepping its mandate and interfering with national sovereignty.

Step-by-Step: How the Initiative Is Unfolding

1. Coalition Building: Italy and Denmark drafted the open letter and circulated it among other EU states, seeking support.
2. Publication and Advocacy: The letter was published on May 22, 2025, and is being used to lobby for a change in how the ECHR is applied in migration cases.
3. Political Pressure: The coalition is using the letter to pressure the ECtHR and EU institutions to reconsider the scope of the Convention’s interpretation.
4. Potential Legal and Policy Changes: If enough support is gathered, the coalition could propose formal reforms to the ECHR or seek to limit the ECtHR’s jurisdiction in migration matters.

What Are the Main Arguments on Each Side?

Proponents (Italy, Denmark, Poland, etc.):
– Say the ECtHR is making decisions that go beyond the original intent of the ECHR.
– Argue that national governments should have more control over migration and asylum policy.
– Believe that current interpretations make it too difficult to manage irregular migration and protect national interests.

Opponents (Human Rights Organizations, Some EU States):
– Warn that weakening the ECtHR’s role could lead to more human rights violations.
– Argue that the court’s broad interpretation is needed to protect vulnerable migrants and asylum seekers.
– Point out that international human rights standards are more important than ever in times of political tension.

EU Institutions:
– The EU itself is not a party to the ECHR, but all member states are.
– The EU tries to balance its commitment to human rights with the need for effective migration management.
– The question of whether the EU as an institution should join the ECHR remains unresolved.

Real-World Examples: How ECtHR Rulings Have Impacted Policy

• Denmark: After the ECtHR ruled against its family reunification policy, Denmark had to change its law, allowing refugees to bring family members sooner.
• Italy: The ECtHR found Italy responsible for returning migrants to Libya, where they faced abuse. Italy was forced to reconsider its practices at sea and at its borders.

These cases show how the ECtHR can directly influence national laws and practices, sometimes against the wishes of elected governments.

Policy Implications and Risks

National Sovereignty:
The main goal of the initiative is to give national governments more power over migration and asylum decisions, reducing the influence of international courts.

Legal Uncertainty:
If countries start ignoring ECtHR rulings, there could be confusion about what rights migrants and asylum seekers actually have. This could lead to more court cases and possible violations of international law.

Human Rights Impact:
Human rights organizations warn that the move could make it harder for people fleeing war, persecution, or abuse to find safety in Europe. There is a risk of increased pushbacks, detention, and even forced returns to dangerous countries (known as “refoulement”).

What Happens Next?

• Coalition Expansion: More EU countries are expected to sign the letter in the coming weeks.
• Policy Proposals: If the coalition grows, it may propose formal changes to the ECHR or seek to limit the ECtHR’s power in migration cases.
• Legal and Political Challenges: The initiative will likely face strong opposition from human rights groups and some EU states, leading to debates and possible legal battles.
• EU Accession to ECHR: The question of whether the EU itself should join the ECHR remains open, with important implications for how EU institutions are held accountable.

Frequently Asked Questions

Will this initiative change the law right away?
No. The open letter is a political statement, not a legal change. However, if enough countries support it, it could lead to formal proposals for reform.

How will this affect people seeking asylum?
If the coalition’s goals are achieved, it could become harder to apply for asylum in Europe, and there may be more cases of people being detained or sent back to unsafe countries.

What is the EU’s official position?
The EU says it remains committed to human rights and the ECHR, but is also under pressure to help member states manage migration more effectively.

Key Facts and Figures

Official Resources

• European Court of Human Rights: For official rulings and legal information
• Italian Government: For the open letter and official statements
• Danish Government: For policy documents and updates

What Should Stakeholders Do Now?

• Governments: Monitor the coalition’s progress and prepare for possible changes in how the ECHR is applied.
• Asylum Seekers and Migrants: Stay informed about your rights and seek legal advice if you are affected by new policies or court decisions.
• Advocacy Groups: Continue to document and report on the impact of policy changes on vulnerable groups.
• Employers and Service Providers: Be aware of potential changes in migration and asylum rules that could affect your workforce or clients.

Conclusion

The initiative led by Italy and Denmark represents a major challenge to the current system of human rights protection in Europe, especially in the area of migration and asylum. While the immediate effects are political, the long-term consequences could reshape how the European Convention on Human Rights is interpreted and enforced. This could mean stricter asylum rules, less oversight by international courts, and greater uncertainty for migrants and asylum seekers. As the coalition grows and debates continue, all eyes will be on the European Court of Human Rights and the governments of Europe to see how they balance national interests with the protection of fundamental human rights.

For the latest updates and authoritative information, visit the European Court of Human Rights official website.

Learn Today

European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) → A 1950 treaty protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms across Europe, enforced by the ECtHR.
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) → The judicial body enforcing the ECHR, hearing cases about human rights violations by member states.
Migration and Asylum Pact → EU agreement from May 2024 imposing stricter asylum rules and faster deportation procedures.
Refoulement → The forced return of asylum seekers to countries where they face danger, which is prohibited under international law.
National Sovereignty → The authority of a state to govern itself without external interference, central to the coalition’s argument.

This Article in a Nutshell

Italy and Denmark spearhead a coalition demanding reform of ECHR’s migration rulings, aiming to strengthen national control amid rising asylum pressures and ECtHR decisions limiting policy flexibility.
— By VisaVerge.com

Read more:

• How diplomatic immunity works under the Vienna Convention in the US
• USCIS Adoption: New Hague Adoption Convention Guidance
• TN Visa Job Categories: Eligibility and Options for Non-Conventional Roles
• UK proposes sweeping Immigration System changes in new white paper
• Singapore reviews permanent resident status for those convicted of crimes