Polish PM Donald Tusk told UK journalists that the European Convention on Human Rights limits the deportation of convicted criminals, used UK data to illustrate the problem, and hinted that leaving the Convention might be a prudent option.
Tusk’s Claim on the Convention
In a Sunday Times interview, Tusk stated that the Convention restricts European states from deporting “legally convicted criminals, rapists and terrorists.” He framed this as a threat to national security, arguing that the current structure grants excessive protection to migrants. He implied that reform or exit could be “quite sensible.”
UK Deportation Record
Since 2015, the UK has deported approximately 5,000 foreign nationals with criminal convictions each year. Over the past decade, about 40,000 such deportations were carried out. The UK has also lost a single case before the European Court of Human Rights regarding a deportation of a convicted foreigner. The case involved a migrant accused of fraud and misuse of travel documents.
EU Court Examples
Between 1975 and 2024 the Court issued five judgments on UK deportations. One concerned Article 3 (prohibition of torture) for a drug smuggler who was gravely ill. Four judgments cited Article 8 (privacy and family life), blocking deportations of a 24‑year‑old Nigerian, a Pakistani living in the UK since age 3, a Nigerian sex‑offender, and a case involving a visa‑fraudster whose removal had already been decided. None of the cases involved Poland.
Tusk’s Narrative Motive
Poland’s PM links the narrative of “criminal migrants” with those lacking legal status, arguing that allowing asylum applications would lead to a backlog of “illegals” committing “brutal offences” and that the Convention would prevent deportation. Tusk’s statement disregards that asylum is not automatically granted and that deportation blocks rely on Articles 3 and 8 exemptions.
Legal Basis and Exemptions
The Convention’s Articles 3 and 8 provide absolute safeguards against torture and allow limited interference in privacy and family life for security purposes. The Court has recognized extraordinary circumstances where deportations are prohibited, but also noted that permanent residence and strong ties to the host country can warrant exemptions.