EU States Challenge ECtHR's Authority, Threatening Article 10 Protections
A joint letter signed by nine EU member states in May 2025 has sparked concern about a potential erosion of Article 10 protections and the long-term viability of judicial diplomacy in Europe. The letter, challenging the European Court of Human Rights' (ECtHR) jurisprudential direction on migration, has raised questions about the EU's commitment to judicial independence and human rights.
Maria Merkouraki argues that this pushback signals a sovereignty-led challenge to the ECtHR's authority. Some states, like Poland and Spain, have been known to refuse internalising Strasbourg jurisprudence when it clashes with domestic political priorities, threatening Article 10 protections and the EU's rule-of-law credibility. The ECtHR's soft enforcement model, dependent on state compliance, has reached a critical point, with many Article 10 judgments only partially implemented or ignored by states.
Judges now face new challenges in the digital age, ruling on issues like algorithmic bias, media pluralism, and AI-generated misinformation with limited legal precedent. To strengthen judicial diplomacy, the ECtHR needs binding compliance triggers, an expanded remit, linked assessments, and a European Judicial Digital Observatory for coordinated jurisprudence in high-risk areas. The future of the ECtHR and the EU's credibility as a normative power hinge on the political courage of courts and the resilience of Europe's human rights system in reinforcing judicial independence and Article 10 protections.
The joint letter from nine EU member states, including Denmark, Italy, and Poland, has highlighted the need for the EU to reinforce judicial independence and Article 10 protections. Failure to do so risks jeopardising the EU's identity as a strong community of shared values and undermining its rule-of-law credibility.
