Does the European Convention on Human Rights hinder defence against illegal immigration?

political analyst

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDC7aNxxhOs

James Mates reported that very few of the immigrants who travel in boats from northern Africa and enter EU territory have been repatriated.

Not all of those immigrants are fleeing from countries that are ruled by tyrants.

Considering the grumbling that is taking place in the British Conservative party regarding the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), it must be asked: does the ECHR hinder the ability of European countries that are members of the Council of Europe to fight against illegal immigration?

28064212

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058293328/does-the-european-convention-on-human-rights-hinder-defence-against-illegal-immigration

it must be asked

No, it mustn't. That's the same Conservative party that said they couldn't restrict EU immigration and had to leave the EU, right? Even though they had that power all along, and most other EU countries were doing exactly what they claimed to be prevented from doing? The Conservative party have no interest in stopping immigration - it would destroy their economy (by orders of magnitude more than the damage they have already done). They do have an interest in having someone to blame, and since they more or less accidentally blundered their way out of the EU, they need a new boogeyman.

The question that "must" be asked: which specific provisions of the ECHR are hindering defence against illegal immigration? It's not a long document, only 14 pages, and only 4 of them are actually specifying rights and freedoms (the rest is about the operation of the courts). So in those 4 pages, which specific provisions do they have a problem with?

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058293328/does-the-european-convention-on-human-rights-hinder-defence-against-illegal-immigration

Depends on how you want to fight it. For example, if you want to shoot undocumented migrants out of hand as a way of discouraging others, the Convention will definitely be an obstacle to that policy.

I'm not suggesting, of course, that you do advocate that policy. The point is rather that the Convention being an obstacle to a policy is not necessarily a bad thing. Policies that breach human rights might, perish the thought, be bad policies that ought to be checked.