Pressure is mounting within Germany’s conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) for the federal government to join a coalition of 27 European nations attempting to reinterpret the European Convention on Human Rights, a move ostensibly aimed at expanding legal avenues for deportations. The initiative has ignited a contentious debate about the balance between individual rights, national security and the authority of the European Court of Human Rights.
CDU politician Detlef Seif, the party’s special representative for the “implementation of the European asylum and migration transformation” argued that Germany’s standing as a pivotal force in European migration policy is being undermined by its reluctance to participate. He emphasized that the core principles of human rights are non-negotiable but lamented what he perceives as an overly expansive interpretation that increasingly compromises citizen safety. “It cannot be squared with the image of Germany as a leading force if 27 countries are issuing a declaration for a reassessment of the Human Rights Convention to reach a better balance in migration policy – and Germany is not involved” Seif stated.
The emerging debate centers on the interpretation of key articles within the Convention. While recognizing the inviolability of Article 3, which prohibits torture and degrading treatment, Seif advocated for a more pragmatic application. He suggested that the precarious living conditions in a potential deportee’s home country should not automatically preclude repatriation, particularly in cases involving repeat offenders or serious criminals. Similarly, the application of Article 8, protecting family life, has come under scrutiny. Seif argued that the right to family unity should be weighed against the public interest when dealing with individuals convicted of repeated offenses or serious crimes, suggesting that deportation should remain an option even in such circumstances.
Fellow CDU parliamentary vice-president Günter Krings echoed this sentiment, calling for reforms to the Convention, potentially through a new supplementary protocol. He warned that blocking necessary adjustments risks eroding public trust in the Convention’s efficacy.
However, the initiative has drawn sharp criticism from within Germany’s Social Democratic Party (SPD). Gabriela Heinrich, the party’s spokesperson for human rights and humanitarian aid, accused the movement as an attack on the judicial independence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which is responsible for upholding the Convention. She noted a rising pressure on the court from several states, characterizing the planned political declaration as an attempt to undermine its credibility.
The declaration, signed by 27 European nations – including 19 EU member states – calls for a discussion on the interpretation of the Human Rights Convention with the express purpose of creating greater legal flexibility in migration matters. It emphasizes the need to find a “balanced relationship” between the rights of migrants and the public interest in safeguarding liberty and security.
Significantly, the German government has thus far refused to endorse the position. While all member states of the Council of Europe initially agreed to formulate a political declaration on migration and the Convention by May 2027, Germany’s continued abstention fuels fears of a growing divide within Europe regarding the fundamental rights of migrants and the limits of national sovereignty. The episode highlights a critical juncture in Europe’s ongoing struggle to reconcile humanitarian obligations with increasingly strained security concerns.
