After Council of Europe ministers signed off on the first step toward reforming the European Union’s top human rights convention on December 10, observers warn that the human-rights framework may be collapsing across the continent.
Many European governments are accusing the European Court of Human Rights, also known as the Strasbourg Court, of overreaching and restricting national security policies in migration cases.
Meeting in Strasbourg on December 10, EU ministers in a joint declaration demanded a tougher stance on human smuggling, stronger border protections and greater latitude for expelling offenders.
The Strasbourg Court is an international court of the Council of Europe, which interprets the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) across 46 member states, including all 27 EU countries.
The joint declaration is the clearest sign yet that the current status quo regarding migration is being challenged.
Officials within the Council of Europe dispute the claim that the system is collapsing, arguing the human rights convention still plays a vital role.
“The European Convention on Human Rights is the final safeguard of individual rights and freedoms across our continent and a pillar of democratic security,” said Council of Europe Secretary-General Alain Berset.
Lawyer Bartosz Lewandowski told Brussels Signal today that the shift reflects a deeper political realignment: “We are currently witnessing the collapse of the existing human rights protection system in Europe,” he said.
“This is not only due to the clear erosion of the left-liberal system in Europe and the strengthening of conservative circles but also directly results from the immigration crisis, the decline in living standards and the decrease in security,” he added.
The changes are being spearheaded by a coalition of States, including the UK, Denmark, Italy, Hungary, Norway, Slovakia and Poland.
According to Lewandowski, the ECHR “has alienated many European governments” with its “uncompromising stance on migration issues and its punishment of countries for deporting illegal immigrants or tightening controls”.
In Strasbourg, Berset conceded that the continent faces challenges from organised smuggling, trafficking networks and the destabilisation caused by uncontrolled migration.
He has tasked ministers with drafting a political declaration for adoption in May 2026, insisting that the human rights convention can be adapted.
“What we need is dialogue, co-operation, and shared solutions that allow member states to engage on an equal footing within the framework of the Council of Europe,” he concluded.
Lewandowski pondered: “Perhaps it will be the United Kingdom that becomes the first country to denounce the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, precisely because of the clear contradiction between the rulings of the Strasbourg Court and the demands of British society.
“If this happens, it is highly likely that the entire system of human rights protection in Europe as we know it will collapse like a house of cards. Other countries may follow the example of the United Kingdom,” he added.
Critics in the UK are already pushing for departure.
Conservative MP Robert Jenrick, who has accused France of effectively enabling migrants to cross the Channel, dismisses the idea of reforming the ECHR as little more than sleight of hand.
“The idea that you can meaningfully reform the ECHR is a trick,” he said.
“The British people are being put at risk. To tackle this national-security emergency, we must leave the ECHR immediately,” he added.
Others believe leaving could be a mistake and create a greater risk.
Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, spoke of the critical role that the ECHR plays in safeguarding rights.
“A fair society protects us all and gives us the tools we need to enforce these protections. We all benefit when we can uphold the interests of everyone in our community and challenge government decisions that directly affect our lives,” he said.
The UK Attorney General Richard Hermer KC has declared that leaving the ECHR would not be in Britain’s interest.
In testimony to the House of Lords Constitution Committee, he said such a move would violate the Good Friday Agreement and damage Britain’s global standing as it would also require leaving other international treaties.
“We would have to leave not only the European Convention on Human Rights but also the refugee convention, the torture convention, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,” he said..
We would become, together with Russia and Belarus, in splendid isolation on this planet”.
