In his post the Evangelos Venizelos It notes that in the explanatory memorandum of the amendment tabled by the government to treat illegal incoming migrant Floats through North Africa, it references to Article 15 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which corresponds to Article 48 of the Constitution on the implementation of the law on the state of siege.

“Obviously this is inappropriate. At least that’s how I hope, “he says and concludes:” The easy and unacceptable invocation of this ECHR provision raises the question of the highest importance for the state of the rule of law in our country and the respect of its fundamental obligations under international law. The least that needs to be done immediately is the revocation of this etiological thought – a statement from the amendment, in addition to obviously the other legal problems it raises. “

Mr. Venizelos’ post:

“The Government cites Article 15 ECHR, namely the equivalent of Article 48 Council. For the implementation of the Siege Law!

In the explanatory memorandum (analysis of the consequences of regulation) of the amendment tabled by the relevant ministers to treat the incoming inbound in the country “illegally by any floating means of North Africa”, the following statement is included:

‘They are [ δε] The conditions of Article 15 of the European Convention on Human Rights, according to which the Contracting States, in the event of a public risk that threatens the life of the nation, may even take measures even in breach of the obligations provided for in the Convention, in the required condition required by the situation.

Let’s see what that means.

Article 15 of the ECHR, corresponding to Article 48 of the Greek Constitution on the Siege Status (Military Law), is as follows:

“Article 15

Derogation in case of emergency

1. In the event of a war or other public risk threatening the life of the nation, each high contract may have taken measures in violation of this contract of procedure, in the demand required by the state of which are absolutely necessary and in the case of any other obligations. International Law.

2. The preceding provision shall not allow Article 2 to be violated, in the case of death as a result of normal war acts, or Articles 3, 4 (para. 1) and 7.

3. The Exercises This right of the infringement of the infringement of high Contracting Parties shall observe the Secretary of the Council of Europe, fully aware of the measures taken as well as the causes that have taken them. They must also inform the Secretary -General of the Council of Europe on the date on which these measures ceased to be applicable and the provisions of the Convention were re -enacted. ”

According to the Summary by the Secretariat of the European Court of Justice of the Human Rights of the Jurisprudence on the conditions for the application of Article 15 ECHR, the following shall apply:

“Article 15 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides the governments of the Member States of the Convention, under exceptional conditions, the ability to deviate, in a temporary, limited and supervision, by their obligation to ensure certain rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention.

The use of this provision is governed by the following procedural and substantive conditions:

  • Invoice the right to derogation can only be done in times of war or other emergency that threatens the life of the nation;
  • A state may take derogation measures from its obligations under the contract only to the extent required by the needs of the situation;
  • Any derogation may not be incompatible with other international obligations of the state;
  • Some of the rights of the contract may not be derogated at all: Article 15 § 2 prohibits any derogation on the right to life (other than legal acts), the prohibition of torture and inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment, the prohibition of labor and the labor and the prohibition of labor and labor.

Correspondingly, no derogation is permitted by:

– Article 1 of Protocol No. 6 (abolition of the death penalty in times of peace),
– Article 1 of Protocol No. 13 (abolition of the death penalty under any circumstances),
– Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 (right not to be tried or punished twice for the same offense).

  • Finally, at a procedural level, the state using the derogation right must fully inform the Secretary -General of the Council of Europe. ”

In the present case, if the conditions referred to in Article 15 (1) of the ECHR are in fact, the provisions of Article 48 Council could be applied to the National Constitutional Class, that is, the entire territory or part of the Conduct Act!

Obviously this is inappropriate. At least so I hope.

I understand the intensity of the problem of migratory flows from Libya and wider from North Africa. The country has been found in similar pressure conditions many times in previous years. Measures have been taken, sometimes more and sometimes less effective, but always within the framework of the Constitution that is inseparable by the ECHR and under the international judicial audit of the ECtHR. There are even cases pending in Strasbourg related to addressing migratory flows that have raised issues regarding Article 15 ECHR.

The easy and unacceptable invocation of this ECHR provision raises the question of the highest importance of the rule of law in our country and the respect of its fundamental obligations under international law. The least to be done immediately is the revocation of this etiological thought – statement From the amendment, beyond obviously the other legal problems it sets. “