Latest news with #EuropeanCourtofHumanRights
Scottish Sun
3 days ago
- Politics
- Scottish Sun
Convicted murderer and ‘Islamist fanatic' gets thousands in legal aid to argue about his anxiety
Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick has hit out at the European Court of Human Rights KILLER'S ANXIETY Convicted murderer and 'Islamist fanatic' gets thousands in legal aid to argue about his anxiety A CONVICTED murderer has got thousands in legal aid to argue that separating him from other lags made him feel too anxious. Islamic convert Denny De Silva, 32 — said to be an 'extremist enforcer' — had taxpayers fund his human rights challenge. Advertisement He has previously been found guilty of smuggling in phones to share IS material and there were complaints he was battering other inmates at HMP Full Sutton, East Yorks. He was sent to a separation unit but in January went to the High Court to argue limiting access to the gym, library, and educational opportunities violated his right to a private life under the European Court of Human Rights. He won the case — adding more to his legal aid bill. De Silva had already run up costs of £42,000 for barristers and £24,000 for solicitors at his 2016 murder trial. Advertisement Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick said: 'This shocking case shows how the ECHR is has become a charter for criminals. "I couldn't care less if a dangerous Islamist fanatic has 'anxiety' from separation centres. 'Governors must be able to lock up radicalising prisoners in isolation without worrying about mad human rights laws.' De Silva was jailed in 2016 for a minimum of 27 years for shooting dead a gangland rival. Advertisement He converted to Islam in prison but is said to intimidate and incite other Muslim prisoners. The Ministry of Justice confirmed the £66,000 figure was correct but billing was not finalised. Inside evil Southport killer's cushy jail life where he STILL gets Maltesers, crisps & other treats despite guard attack
The Irish Sun
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Irish Sun
Convicted murderer and ‘Islamist fanatic' gets thousands in legal aid to argue about his anxiety
A CONVICTED murderer has got thousands in legal aid to argue that separating him from other lags made him feel too anxious. Islamic convert Denny De Silva, 32 — said to be an 'extremist enforcer' — had taxpayers fund his human rights challenge. Advertisement He has previously been found guilty of smuggling in phones to share IS material and there were complaints he was battering other inmates at HMP Full Sutton, East Yorks. He was sent to a separation unit but in January went to the High Court to argue limiting access to the gym, library, and educational opportunities violated his right to a private life under the European Court of Human Rights . He won the case — adding more to his legal aid bill. De Silva had already run up costs of £42,000 for barristers and £24,000 for solicitors at his 2016 murder trial. Advertisement READ MORE ON JAILS Shadow Justice Secretary "I couldn't care less if a dangerous Islamist fanatic has 'anxiety' from separation centres. 'Governors must be able to lock up radicalising prisoners in isolation without worrying about mad human rights laws.' De Silva was jailed in 2016 for a minimum of 27 years for shooting dead a gangland rival. Advertisement Most read in The Sun He converted to Islam in prison but is said to intimidate and incite other Muslim prisoners. The Ministry of Justice confirmed the £66,000 figure was correct but billing was not finalised. Inside evil Southport killer's cushy jail life where he STILL gets Maltesers, crisps & other treats despite guard attack 1 Denny De Silva has run up a legal aid bill complaining about his human rights in jail Credit: Collect
DW
27-05-2025
- Politics
- DW
9 EU states urge migration law rethink at Europe's top court – DW – 05/26/2025
Italy and Denmark have spearheaded a call for a "new interpretation" of the European Convention on Human Rights. Experts say it's a political move that raises questions about judicial independence. The push for more restrictive migration policies from some European governments has pivoted toward Europe's top human rights court. Spearheaded by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and her Danish counterpart, Mette Frederiksen, nine European Union member states have penned an open letter calling for a reinterpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights to make it easier to "expel foreign national criminals." The leaders' exact demands are unclear. The signatories say their goal is to "launch a new and open-minded conversation" rather than elicit quick legal changes. But the move in itself is controversial, sparking questions about judicial independence in Europe and the legal architecture designed to protect human rights. The complicated matter of deportation To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video What is the European Convention on Human Rights? The convention is an international treaty that was drafted and signed some 75 years ago in the aftermath of World War II. It spells out fundamental rights and freedoms for signatory states, such as the prohibition of torture, the right to a fair trial and freedom of expression. In the 1960s, it was updated to ban the death penalty. The convention forms the legal backbone of the Council of Europe, the continent's top human rights body. The organization is older than the European Union, and includes most of the continent's countries — it comprised 47 states until Russia was expelled in 2022 over its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Individuals who believe their rights under the convention have been violated can sue their government at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, after exhausting all national legal pathways. Recent high-profile cases at the court include orders to ground migrant deportation flights bound for Rwanda from the UK over the African country's track record on rights, and older Swiss women asking the court to order their government to take more action against climate change. 'More freedom to decide' In the open letter dated May 22, nine European states call for "more room" to "decide on when to expel criminal foreign nationals" and "more freedom" to track "criminal foreigners who cannot be deported." The states also say they "need to be able to take effective steps" against "hostile states" that are "instrumentalizing migrants." "The world has changed fundamentally since many of our ideas were conceived," they write. "We now live in a globalized world where people migrate across borders on a completely different scale." "We believe that the development in the court's interpretation has, in some cases, limited our ability to make political decisions in our own democracies," the letter reads. The leaders note that their group — which also includes the leaders of Austria, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Belgium, Estonia and the Czech Republic — spans the width of Europe's political spectrum. While Italy's Meloni hails from the hard right, her Danish counterpart is a prominent figure from the EU's center-left. "We know that this is a sensitive discussion. Although our aim is to safeguard our democracies, we will likely be accused of the opposite," they write. Individuals can sue governments at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg if they believe their rights have been violated, and if they have exhausted national legal remedies Image: Vincent Kessler/REUTERS 'No judiciary should face political pressure' The Council of Europe's secretary-general appeared unimpressed in a statement he released in response. "Debate is healthy, but politicizing the court is not. In a society governed by the rule of law, no judiciary should face political pressure," Alain Berset said on Saturday. "Institutions that protect fundamental rights cannot bend to political cycles. If they do, we risk eroding the very stability they were built to ensure. "The court must not be weaponized — neither against governments, nor by them," he added. The Danish and Italian prime ministers took the lead on drafting the open letter, which was signed by seven other EU leaders Image: Matteo Minnella/REUTERS A political act? Basak Cali, a professor focused on international human rights law at the University of Oxford, said the letter was "not a legal way of participating in discussions." "It's more of a political act," she told DW over the phone. "It's not very legally clear in the letter what they would like to change," she said, adding that the court already "exercizes deference to states" in cases related to migration. "They kind of say that the court should agree with them when it has cases in the future. But the point is that that's not how courts work," she said. Pointing finger at court is 'simplistic' Alberto-Horst Neidhardt, a senior migration researcher with the European Policy Centre, said the European Court of Human Rights is not the primary driver of problems EU states face when trying to deport criminals. "Neither European law nor the convention prevent them from expelling persons who pose a security threat," he explained. "It has to do with lack of cooperation between member states. It has to do with legal hope loopholes in the framework. It has to do with lack of cooperation by third countries that oftentimes do not want individuals who pose a security threat back on their territory," he told DW. "It's a bit simplistic to just point the finger to the court." Even if the nine states succeeded in sparking a reassessment of the court, they remain bound by other EU and UN rules on migrant rights. "This stays as a legal fact, regardless of these kinds of letters," said legal scholar Cali. Germany is among many European countries trying to clamp down on irregular migration, including through beefed up border checks Image: John Macdougall/AFP/Getty Images Migration: Europe's political hot potato Though the number of people arriving illegally in Europe has decreased , migration policy remains a fiercely debated issue in the EU — one on which elections can be won or lost. The issue has also contributed toward a rightward political shift in much of Europe. "All the statistics suggest that we are seeing a reduction in irregular arrivals. In some member states, including Germany, we've seen a reduction of first-time asylum applications … Yet the political rhetoric remains very hostile," Neidhardt said. He sees the Italo-Danish push as the latest step in a broader bid to address some voters' concerns. "All these actions may somehow send, in the short term, a political message that is welcome," Neidhardt said. But in the longer term, he added, the new letter and similar moves will keep migration as a top talking point and will be unlikely to shift opinion away from the extremes and toward the political center. "Most likely, they will continue voting for the parties who are somehow sponsoring the most radical solutions to what individuals perceive to be a problem," he said of voters. Edited by: Jess Smee Correction, May 27, 2025: An earlier version of this article misspelled the name of Alain Berset, the Council of Europe's secretary-general. DW apologizes for the error.
LeMonde
27-05-2025
- Politics
- LeMonde
Immigration: Nine European countries seek to weaken the European Court of Human Rights
Europe has begun shifting from tighter control of migration policies to an erosion of migrant rights, under pressure from an emboldened radical right and a segment of the Nordic left. On Thursday, May 22, nine European countries, led by Italy under post-fascist Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Denmark under Social Democrat Mette Frederiksen – the nations that have taken the toughest stance against immigration in recent years – signed an open letter to rethink the "interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights." More broadly, this marked an unprecedented attack on the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the 1950 Convention, which the judges based in Strasbourg interpret and apply in their rulings. "We want to open a political debate on certain European conventions to which we are bound, and on the ability of those conventions today, obviously decades after they were written, to be able to address the major issues of our time, starting precisely from the migration phenomenon," Meloni said on Thursday. In their letter, the leaders of Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and the Czech Republic all said they shared "a firm belief in our European values, the rule of law and human rights," but questioned whether the European Court of Human Rights "in some cases, has extended the scope of the Convention too far as compared with the original intentions behind the Convention, thus shifting the balance between the interests which should be protected."
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Nine EU states push for migration law rethink at top European court
The push for more restrictive migration policies from some European governments has pivoted toward Europe's top human rights court. Spearheaded by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and her Danish counterpart Mette Frederiksen, nine European Union member states have penned an open letter calling for a reinterpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights to make it easier to "expel foreign national criminals." The leaders' exact demands are unclear. The signatories say their goal is to "launch a new and open-minded conversation" rather than elicit quick legal changes, but the move in itself is controversial, sparking questions about judicial independence in Europe and the legal architecture designed to protect human rights. The convention is an international treaty that was drafted and signed some 75 years ago in the aftermath of World War II. It spells out fundamental rights and freedoms for signatory states, such as the prohibition of torture, the right to a fair trial, and freedom of expression. In the 1960s, it was updated to ban the death penalty. The convention forms the legal backbone of the Council of Europe, the continent's top human rights body. The organization is older than the European Union, and includes most of the continent's countries — it comprised 47 countries until Russia was suspended and then left in 2022 over its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Individuals who believe their rights under the convention have been violated can sue their government at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, after exhausting all national legal pathways. Recent high-profile cases at the court include orders to ground migrant deportation flights bound for Rwanda from the UK over the African country's track record on rights, and older Swiss women asking the court to order their government to take more action against climate change. Read the letter in its entirety: — Statsministeriet (@Statsmin) May 22, 2025 In the open letter dated May 22, nine European states call for "more room" to "decide on when to expel criminal foreign nationals" and "more freedom" to track "criminal foreigners who cannot be deported." The states also say they "need to be able to take effective steps" against "hostile states" that are "instrumentalizing migrants." "The world has changed fundamentally since many of our ideas were conceived," they write. "We now live in a globalized world where people migrate across borders on a completely different scale." "We believe that the development in the Court's interpretation has, in some cases, limited our ability to make political decisions in our own democracies," the letter reads. The leaders note that their group — which also includes the leaders of Austria, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Belgium, Estonia and Czechia — spans the width of Europe's political spectrum. While Italy's Meloni hails from the hard right, her Danish counterpart is a prominent figure from the EU's center-left. "We know that this is a sensitive discussion. Although our aim is to safeguard our democracies, we will likely be accused of the opposite," they write. The Council of Europe's secretary-general appeared unimpressed in a statement he released in response. "Debate is healthy, but politicizing the Court is not. In a society governed by the rule of law, no judiciary should face political pressure," Alain Bersel said on Saturday. "Institutions that protect fundamental rights cannot bend to political cycles. If they do, we risk eroding the very stability they were built to ensure." "The Court must not be weaponized — neither against governments, nor by them," he added. Basak Cali, a professor focused on international human rights law at the University of Oxford, said the letter was "not a legal way of participating in discussions." "It's more of a political act," she told DW over the phone. "It's not very legally clear in the letter what they would like to change," she said, adding that the court already "exercizes deference to states" in cases related to migration. "They kind of say that the court should agree with them when it has cases in the future. But the point is. that that's not how courts work," she said. Alberto‑Horst Neidhardt, a senior migration researcher with the European Policy Centre, said the European Court of Human Rights is not the primary driver of problems EU states face when trying to deport criminals. "Neither European law nor the convention prevent them from expelling persons who pose a security threat," he explained. "It has to do with lack of cooperation between member states. It has to do with legal hope loopholes in the framework. It has to do with lack of cooperation by third countries that oftentimes do not want individuals who pose a security threat back on their territory," he told DW, adding: "It's a bit simplistic to just point the finger to the court." Even if the nine states succeeded in sparking a reassessment of the court, they remain bound by other EU and UN rules on migrant rights. "This stays as a legal fact, regardless of these kinds of letters," legal scholar Basak Cali said. Though the number of people arriving illegally in Europe has decreased, migration policy remains a fiercely debated issue in the EU — one on which elections can be won or lost. The issue has also contributed toward a rightward political shift in much of Europe. "All the statistics suggest that we are seeing a reduction in irregular arrivals. In some member states, including Germany, we've seen a reduction of first-time asylum applications … Yet the political rhetoric remains very hostile," Neidhardt said. He sees the Italo-Danish push as the latest step in a broader bid to address some voters' concerns. "All these actions may somehow send, in the short term, a political message that is welcome," Neidhardt said. But in the longer term, he added, the new letter and similar moves will keep migration as a top talking point and will be unlikely to shift opinion away from the extremes and towards the political center. "Most likely, they will continue voting for the parties who are somehow sponsoring the most radical solutions to what individuals perceive to be a problem." Edited by: Jess Smee
