At the annual meeting of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 15 May 2026, the so-called Chişinău Declaration was adopted. In it, European governments, including Germany, call on the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Strasbourg to give states greater scope in the management of migration.
Politically, the declaration has a clear direction. It responds to a debate initiated by the governments of Italy and Denmark, with the active support of, among others, Poland, Austria, and Belgium. In an open letter published in May 2025, these governments called for a partial reversal of dynamic judgments delivered over recent decades that, in their view, have restricted states' room for manoeuvre, particularly regarding the deportation of criminal offenders and responses to attempts to instrumentalize migration at the EU's external borders.
From a legal perspective, the declaration constitutes a non-binding recommendation without clear instructions that the ECtHR is required to follow. Whether it will lead to fundamental changes in the Court's case law on migration-related issues remains uncertain. Even if the Chişinău Declaration were to result in a shift in the Court's jurisprudence, it would likely take considerable time for such changes to be reflected in practice.
Nevertheless, the declaration provides substantive points of reference for further reform efforts at both the national and European level. These include, for example, the expulsion of criminal offenders and individuals considered threats to public security, or to restrictions on removals based on conditions of extreme poverty. In the medium term, the Chişinău Declaration could mark the beginning of a fundamental reform of European asylum policy.
A long-term restructuring of German and European asylum policy would require action on three levels: First, administrative structures should be reassessed. Second, EU asylum legislation should be reviewed. Third, courts would need to return to policymakers a degree of discretion that they still possessed three decades ago.
Such a fundamental reform would require the international legal equivalent of a constitutional amendment in the form of an additional protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. Such a protocol could enter into force once it has been ratified by a significant number of EU Member States. It would have to be considered by both national and European courts and would represent an investment in the long-term effectiveness of the European asylum system.
Please note, to date this paper is only available in German. ………………………………………………..
