ECHR does not prioritise migrants’ rights or automatically prevent deportations, Council of Europe clarifies
The Council of Europe’s Division on Migration and Refugees published a Frequently Asked Questions document on 12 February 2026, explaining how the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) applies to migration issues. It clarifies which rights are relevant to non-nationals, how national authorities retain discretion over entry and stay, and the limited circumstances under which the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) may intervene. The document also provides data on immigration-related cases processed over the past decade.
The FAQ document emphasises that the ECHR protects the rights and freedoms of everyone within the jurisdiction of Member States, whether or not they are nationals. While it does not establish a right to asylum, certain articles, including Article 3 (prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment) and Article 8 (right to private and family life), apply in migration cases. The document notes that States maintain the right to control entry and stay, provided fundamental protections are respected. It also highlights the principle of “margin of appreciation”, under which national authorities are best placed to balance individual rights with public interest, and that interim measures to suspend removals are granted only exceptionally.
According to the FAQ, over the past ten years, the ECHR has processed more than 430.000 applications, of which fewer than 2% (7.387) concerned immigration. Of these, over 92% (6,861) were dismissed, and only around 450 cases – roughly one in a thousand of all applications – resulted in a finding of a human rights violation. As of 1 January 2026, only 870 of the 53.194 applications pending before the Court (approximately 1.5%) relate to immigration. These figures indicate that migration cases are relatively rare, and that the Court generally defers to national authorities when decisions are reasoned and proportionate.
The FAQ clarifies that the ECHR does not prioritise migrants’ rights over the interests of the State and does not automatically prevent deportations. Expulsions of serious offenders or individuals posing security risks may be compatible with the Convention when proportionality and human rights safeguards are respected. The document highlights the Court’s approach of balancing protection of fundamental rights with States’ sovereign discretion over migration, reaffirming that adherence to the ECHR does not prevent authorities from enforcing immigration measures in line with international law.
For further details, please read the FAQ attached below and read this press release.