Reflections on Refoulement and Collective Expulsion in the Hirsi Case

Abstract

The Hirsi judgment of the European Court of Human Rights stands out as a beacon for protecting the rights of migrants who attempt to cross the sea in search of a better life elsewhere only to be confronted with measures of interdiction. The European Court not only underscores the point that human rights do apply to migrants who are intercepted at sea, but also fleshes out the less straightforward issue of what human rights protection in the course of migrant interdiction should in practice amount to. This article comments on the judgment with a special focus on its wider implications: migrant interception and rescue operations at sea, direct and indirect refoulement under article 3 ECHR, and safe third country and readmission practices. It also reflects on the judgment’s consequences for European Union law.