Pressure is mounting within the German Christian Democratic Union (CDU) for the federal government to join a burgeoning initiative spearheaded by 27 European states aimed at reassessing the European Convention on Human Rights. The stated goal is to secure greater legal latitude concerning deportations, a move that has ignited a contentious debate about the balance between security concerns and fundamental rights.
CDU politician Detlef Seif, the party’s designated representative for the “implementation of the European asylum and migration transformation” argued that Germany’s continued reluctance to participate projects a paradoxical image. “Germany is increasingly viewed as a leading force in European asylum and migration policy” he told “Welt” newspaper. “It’s incongruous for 27 countries to issue a declaration concerning a reassessment of the Human Rights Convention, seeking a better balance in migration policy and for Germany to stand apart”. Seif emphasized that the core tenets of human rights are non-negotiable, but voiced concerns regarding the “expansive interpretation of human rights that ultimately comes at the expense of citizen safety.
The focus of the CDU’s critique centers around specific articles within the Convention. While acknowledging the critical safeguards against torture and inhumane treatment (Article 3) and the protection of family life (Article 8), Seif argued that the interpretations increasingly hinder legitimate deportation efforts. He highlighted cases involving convicted criminals, even those facing precarious conditions in their countries of origin, where deportation is currently blocked due to perceived hardships. “It cannot be permissible that the deportation of serious offenders is prohibited simply because living conditions in their home country are precarious” he stated. Similarly, he suggested that the protection afforded to families should not override the need to remove repeat offenders or serious criminals from the country, even if they have family ties in Germany.
CDU parliamentary group vice Günter Krings echoed this sentiment, advocating for reform of the European Convention on Human Rights, potentially through a new supplementary protocol. He warned that blocking necessary adjustments could erode public acceptance of the Convention.
However, the initiative has drawn sharp criticism from within the Social Democratic Party (SPD). Gabriela Heinrich, the SPD’s spokesperson for human rights and humanitarian aid, accused participating nations of applying undue pressure on the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), the body tasked with upholding the Convention. “The planned political declaration for a realignment of human rights in the context of migration is an attack on judicial independence and, consequently, on the credibility of the court as a whole” Heinrich declared to “Welt”.
On December 10th, 27 European states, including 19 EU member nations, initiated discussions concerning the interpretation of the Human Rights Convention, aiming to establish greater maneuvering room in migration matters. The declared intention is to foster a more equitable balance between the individual rights of migrants and the legitimate public interests of safeguarding freedom and security throughout European societies.
Notably, the German federal government has refrained from endorsing this position. Member states of the Council of Europe had previously agreed, in principle, to adopt a political declaration on migration and the Human Rights Convention by May 2027, signaling the complexity and potential long-term implications of this ongoing debate. The initiative underscores a growing tension within Europe regarding how to reconcile humanitarian obligations with heightened security concerns following increased migration flows, raising profound questions about the future of human rights law and the role of the judiciary in safeguarding those rights.