The proposition that withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights would definitively halt the flow of irregular migration, often termed ‘stopping the boats’, faces considerable skepticism from legal experts. It is argued that the actual influence of such a departure on immigration patterns has been significantly exaggerated in public discourse.
The challenges associated with irregular migration, including the use of small vessels for Channel crossings, are multifaceted and deeply rooted in various factors. These include geopolitical instability, economic disparities, the operations of sophisticated human trafficking networks, and the complexities of international asylum law. While the European Convention on Human Rights establishes fundamental human rights protections, its direct role in determining the volume or method of irregular entries is often misconstrued.
Domestic immigration legislation and other international conventions, such as the 1951 Refugee Convention, primarily govern a nation’s ability to manage its borders and process asylum claims. The ECHR typically serves as a framework for ensuring that these processes adhere to minimum human rights standards, rather than dictating the core policies around who can enter or reside in a country. Therefore, a nation’s ability to control its borders and manage migration is largely independent of its membership in the ECHR, relying instead on its sovereign laws and international agreements beyond this specific convention.
Critically, many operational and legal hurdles in addressing irregular migration are not exclusively or even primarily tied to the ECHR. Issues such as the difficulty of returning individuals to safe third countries, the legal complexities of processing asylum applications, and the need for international cooperation to dismantle smuggling rings, exist within broader legal and diplomatic contexts. The narrative suggesting that leaving the ECHR would provide an immediate and effective solution to these complex problems tends to overlook these intricate layers. Consequently, while a departure from the Convention would undoubtedly have profound legal and diplomatic implications, its anticipated impact on significantly reducing irregular migration may not be as direct or dramatic as sometimes presented.
