Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fundamental Rights in the Context of Externalized Immigration Control

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Encyclopedia of Contemporary Constitutionalism

  • 23 Accesses

Abstract

People fleeing persecution or searching for a better future are confronted with increasing difficulties when they try to enter Europe. Fortified borders, operations at the high seas, and cooperation agreements with North-African transit States all aim at preventing irregular migrants from setting a foot on the territory of European destination States. However, these endeavours to intercept unwanted migrants find their limits in human rights guarantees enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights. Besides the principle of non-refoulement, the prohibition of collective expulsion has gained momentum in recent years.

The purpose of the following contribution is to analyze the interpretation of these guarantees in the recent case law of the European Court of Human Rights. To this end, firstly the concept of jurisdiction and its application in cases of externalized immigration control shall be discussed. Subsequently, it will be shown how the Court interprets and applies the relevant substantive guarantees. Following the most important strands of the case law, the focus will be on the principle of non-refoulement and the prohibition of collective expulsion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

Case-Law

  • ECommHR Becker v. Denmark (dec.), no. 7011/75, 3 October 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR (GC) Al-Skeini and Others v. United Kingdom, no. 55721/07, 7 July 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR (GC) Assanidze v. Georgia, no. 71503/01, 8 April 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR (GC) Banković and Others v. Begium and Others (dec.), no. 52207/99, 12 December 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR (GC) Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy, no. 27765/09, 23 February 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR (GC) Ilaşcu and Others v. Moldova and Russia, no. 48787/99, 8 July 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR (GC) Khlaifia and Others v. Italy, no. 16483/12, 15 December 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR (GC) M.N. and Others v. Belgium (dec.), no. 3599/18, 5 May 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR (GC) M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece, no. 30696/09, 21 January 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR (GC) Medvedyev and Others v. France, no. 3394/03, 29 March 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR (GC) N.D. and N.T. v. Spain, nos. 8675/15 and 8697/15, 13 February 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR (GC) Saadi v. Italy, no. 37201/06, 28 February 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR A.S. and Others v. Lithuania, no. 44205/21, currently pending.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Ahmed and Others v. Latvia, no. 42165/21, currently pending.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. United Kingdom (dec.), no. 61498/08, 30 June 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Amiri and Others v. Poland, no. 42120/21, currently pending.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Andric v. Sweden (dec.) no. 45917/99, 23 February 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Asady and Others v. Slovakia, no. 24917/15, 24 March 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Berisha and Haljiti v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (dec.), no. 18670/03, 16 June 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Čonka v. Belgium, no. 51564/99, 5 February 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR D.A. and Others v. Poland, no. 51246/17, 8 July 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Dritsas and Others v. Italy (dec), no. 2344/02, 1 February 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR M.A. and Others v. Lithuania, no. 59793/17, 11 December 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR M.K. and Others v. Poland, nos. 40503/17, 42902/17 and 43643/17, 23 July 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Moustahi v. France, no. 9347/14, 25 June 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR R.A. and Others v. Poland, no. 42120/21, currently pending.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Shahzad v. Hungary, no. 12625/17, 8 July 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Sharifi and Others v. Italy and Greece, no. 16643/09, 21 October 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Soering v. United Kingdom, no. 14038/88, 7 July 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Women on Waves and Others v. Portugal, no. 31276/05, 3 February 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • ECtHR Xhavara and Others v. Italy and Albania (dec.), no. 39473/98, 11 January 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Human Rights Committee, A.S. and Others v. Italy, CCPR/C/130/D/3042/2017, 4 November 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Human Rights Committee, A.S. and Others v. Malta, CCPR/C/128/D/3043/2017, 13 March 2020.

    Google Scholar 

Literature

  • Alonso Sanz, Lucía. 2021. Deconstructing Hirsi: The return of hot returns. European Constitutional Law Review 17: 335–352. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019621000213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, Richard. 2010. The international law of the sea and migration control. In Extraterritorial immigration control. Legal challenges, ed. Bernard Ryan and Valsamis Mitsilegas, 103–149. Leiden/Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciliberto, Giulia. 2018. Libya’s pull-backs of boat migrants: Can Italy be held accountable for violations of international law? The Italian Law Journal 4: 489–530. https://doi.org/10.23815/2421-2156.ITALJ.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2021. A brand-new exclusionary clause to the prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens: The Applicant’s own conduct in N.D. and N.T. v Spain. Human Rights Law Review 21: 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngaa041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costello, Cathryn. 2012. Courting access to asylum in Europe: Recent supranational jurisprudence explored. Human Rights Law Review 12: 287–339. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngs011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cusumano, Eugenio, and Kristof Gombeer. 2020. In deep waters: The legal, humanitarian and political implications of closing Italian ports to migrant rescuers. Mediterranean Politics 25: 245–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2018.1532145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dastyari, Azadeh, and Daniel Ghezelbash. 2020. Asylum at sea: The legality of shipboard refugee status determination procedures. International Journal of Refugee Law 32: 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eez046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Den Heijer, Marten. 2013. Reflections on refoulement and collective expulsion in the Hirsi case. International Journal of Refugee Law 25: 265–290. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eet020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Filippo, Marcello. 2020. Walking the (barbed) wire of the prohibition of collective expulsion: An assessment of the Strasbourg case law. Diritti umani e diritto internazionale 14: 479–509. https://doi.org/10.12829/97965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer-Lescano, Andreas, Tillmann Löhr, and Timo Tohidipur. 2009. Border controls at sea: Requirements under international human rights and refugee law. International Journal of Refugee Law 21: 256–296. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eep008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, Anne T., and Fiona David. 2014. The international law of migrant smuggling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gammeltoft-Hansen, Thomas. 2010. Growing barriers: International refugee law. In Universal human rights and extraterritorial obligations, ed. Mark Gibney and Sigrun Skogly, 55–81. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Giuffré, Mariagiulia. 2012. Watered-down rights on the high seas: Hirsi Jamaa and others v Italy (2012). International & Comparative Law Quarterly 61: 728–750. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589312000231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. Access to asylum at sea? Non-refoulement and a comprehensive approach to extraterritorial human rights obligations. In ‘Boat refugees’ and migrants at sea: A comprehensive approach. Integrating maritime security with human rights, ed. Violeta Moreno-Lax and Efthymios Papastavridis, 248–275. Leiden/Boston: Brill Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin-Gill, Guy S. 2011. The right to seek asylum: Interception at sea and the principle of non-refoulement. International Journal of Refugee Law 23: 443–457. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eer018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin-Gill, Guy S., and Jan McAdam. 2007. The refugee in international law. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guild, Elspeth, and Vladislava Stoyanova. 2018. The human right to leave any country. A right to be delivered. In European yearbook on human rights 2018, ed. Wolfgang Benedek, Philip Czech, Lisa Heschl, et al., 373–394. Cambridge: Intersentia.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, David, Ed Bates, Michael O’Boyle, et al., eds. 2018. Harris, O’Boyle & Warbrick. Law of the European Convention on Human Rights. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassner, Ron E., and Jason Wittenberg. 2015. Barriers to entry. Who builds fortified boundaries and why? International Security 40: 157–190. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klug, Anja, and Tim Howe. 2010. The concept of state jurisdiction and the applicability on the non-refoulement principle to extraterritorial interception measures. In Extraterritorial immigration control. Legal challenges, ed. Bernard Ryan and Valsamis Mitsilegas, 69–101. Leiden/Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komp, Lisa-Marie. 2017. The duty to assist persons in distress: An alternative source of protection against the return of migrants and asylum seekers to the high seas? In ‘Boat refugees’ and migrants at sea: A comprehensive approach. Integrating maritime security with human rights, ed. Violeta Moreno-Lax and Efthymios Papastavridis, 222–247. Leiden/Boston: Brill Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korte, Kristina. 2020. “Who is the animal in the zoo?” Fencing in and fencing out at the Hungarian-Serbian border. A qualitative case study. Journal of Borderlands Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2020.1787188.

  • Lawson, Rick. 2011. Across the universe? The extra-territorial application of the European Convention on Human Rights. In European yearbook on human rights 2011, ed. Wolfgang Benedek, Florence Benoît-Rohmer, Wolfram Karl, and Manfred Nowak, 427–444. Antwerp: European Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallory, Conall. 2020. Human rights imperialists. The extraterritorial application of the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford/New York: Hart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milanović, Marko. 2011. Extraterritorial application of human rights treaties: Law, principles and policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mitsilegas, Valsamis. 2019. Extraterritorial immigration control, preventive justice and the rule of law in turbulent times: Lessons from the anti-smuggling crusade. In Constitutionalising the external dimensions of EU migration policies in times of crisis. Legality, rule of law and fundamental rights reconsidered, ed. Sergio Carrera, Juan Santos Vara, and Tineke Strik, 290–307. Cheltenham: Elgar.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-Lax, Violeta. 2012. Hirsi Jamaa and Others v Italy or the Strasbourg Court versus extraterritorial migration control? Human Rights Law Review 12: 574–598. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngs024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018. The EU humanitarian border and the securitization of human rights: The ‘rescue-through-interdiction/rescue-without-protection’ paradigm. Journal of Common Market Studies 56: 119–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2020. The architecture of functional jurisdiction: Unpacking contactless control – On public powers, S.S. and Others v. Italy, and the “operational model”. German Law Journal 21: 385–416. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2020.25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noll, Gregor. 2005. Seeking asylum at embassies: A right to entry under international law? International Journal of Refugee Law 17: 542–573. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eei020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogg, Kate. 2014. Protection closer to home? A legal case for claiming asylum at embassies and consulates. Refugee Survey Quarterly 33: 81–113. https://doi.org/10.1093/rsq/hdu014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papanicolopulu, Irini. 2018. International law and the protection of people at sea. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Papastavridis, Efthymios. 2013. European Convention of Human Rights and the law of the sea: The Strasbourg Court in unchartered waters? In The interpretation and application of the European Convention of Human Rights. Legal and practical implications, ed. Malgosia Fitzmaurice and Panos Merkouris, 117–146. Leiden/Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2020. The European Convention of Human Rights and migration at sea: Reading the “jurisdictional threshold” of the convention under the law of the sea paradigm. German Law Journal 21: 417–435. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2020.23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pijnenburg, Annick. 2018. From Italian pushbacks to Libyan pullbacks: Is Hirsi 2.0 in the making in Strasbourg? European Journal of Migration and Law 20: 396–426. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shachar, Ayelet. 2019. Bordering migration/migrating borders. Berkeley Journal of International Law 37: 93–151. https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38696ZZ3M.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thym, Daniel. 2020. The end of human rights dynamism? Judgments of the ECtHR on ‘hot returns’ and humanitarian visas as a focal point of contemporary European asylum law and policy. International Journal of Refugee Law 32: 569–596. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeab004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trevisanut, Seline. 2014. The principle of non-refoulement and the de-territorialization of border control at sea. Leiden Journal of International Law 27: 661–675. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156514000259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Berckel Smit, Jasper. 2020. Taking onboard the issue of disembarkation. The Mediterranean need for responsibility-sharing after the Malta declaration. European Journal of Migration and Law 22: 492–517. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Essential Reading

  • Hamdan, Eman. 2016. The principle of non-refoulement under the ECHR and the UN Convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Leiden/Boston: Brill Nijhoff.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Henckaerts, Jean-Marie. 1995. Mass expulsion in modern international law and practice. The Hague: Nijhoff.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Moya, David, and Georgios Milios. 2021. Aliens before the European Court of Human Rights. Ensuring minimum standards of human rights protection. Leiden: Brill Nijhoff.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Austrian Human Rights Institute, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria

    Philip Czech

Authors
  1. Philip Czech
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philip Czech .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Cremades & Calvo-Sotelo Abogados, Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Javier Cremades

  2. Public Law II & Philology, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Cristina Hermida

Section Editor information

  1. Universität Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany

    Michael Griesbeck

  2. Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, Raum Juridicum 1.21, Universität Halle, Halle, Deutschland

    Winfried Kluth

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Czech, P. (2022). Fundamental Rights in the Context of Externalized Immigration Control. In: Cremades, J., Hermida, C. (eds) Encyclopedia of Contemporary Constitutionalism. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31739-7_189-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31739-7_189-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-31739-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-31739-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Law and CriminologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation