Minister Jim O’Callaghan has told a meeting of Justice ministers that he believed the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is interpreting “inhuman and degrading treatment” too broadly, with the consequence of curtailing the state’s ability to deport foreign criminals.
The meeting in Strasbourg was held to address concerns from members of the Council of Europe that the European Convention on Human Rights is obstructing efforts against illegal migration.
Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits torture, grants the absolute right to be free from “inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.
In May of this year, nine EU states including Denmark, Italy and Poland urged a rethink over the interpretation of the Article, while the some campaigners in the United Kingdom have urged leaving the European Convention because of limitations on actions against illegal immigration.
Denmark has argued that its efforts to deport foreign nationals who had committed crimes were hampered when those migrants successfully used ECHR rulings and others human rights law in arguing against their deportation. In some cases migrants they would face cruel or degrading treatment in their country of origin.
In his speech to the meeting, Mr O’Callaghan said that Ireland shares “concerns” expressed by Denmark about the challenges the European Convention on Human Rights poses in relation to the issue of migration, the Irish Times reported.
A spokeswoman for Mr O’Callaghan confirmed he believes that “the European Court of Human Rights has interpreted Article 3 on inhuman and degrading treatment too broadly”.
The Minister said there is a “need to ensure that the Convention is understood and applied in a way that meets its core objectives of protecting fundamental rights, while at the same time recognising the realities faced today regarding the expulsion of foreign criminals, [and] the need for clarity about inhuman and degrading treatment”.
Speaking after Wednesday’s meeting, Alain Berset, the head of the Council of Europe, which oversees the convention, said signatory countries were not currently calling for the treaty itself to be rewritten.
“It was the start of a process, on a consensus basis, because it is the only way to make some progress,” he told a news conference.
He added that previous political declarations had allowed countries to “deliver” on common challenges, whilst adding he did not want to predict “what exactly will happen” in the run-up to May’s summit.
“Let us start doing a good job, and then we will see what it means as a conclusion,” he told reporters.
Other countries that have aligned with Denmark and Ireland on the use of the Convention are Italy, Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Montenegro, Netherlands¸ Norway, Poland, Romania, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Sweden, Ukraine and the United Kingdom.
A joint statement from all those, including Ireland, said that in “the challenges in expulsion of foreign criminals, migration management and co-operation with third countries regarding asylum and return procedures, as well as removal procedures and instrumentalisation of migration, a right balance has to be found between the migrants’ individual rights and interests and the weighty public interests of defending freedom and security in our societies”.
The “absolute right” to be free from cruel and degrading treatment should be “constrained to the most serious issues”, the statement said, or countries were prevented “from taking proportionate decisions on the expulsion of foreign criminals, or in removal or extradition cases, including in cases raising issues concerning healthcare and prison conditions”.
States should have the right to “control the entry, residence, and expulsion of foreigners from their territories”, the statement.