The binoculars at the borders of Europe : on evidentiary rules and human rights protection

Abstract

A mere two months into 2025, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) have dealt with no less than 7 cases – of which 5 before the respective Grand Chambers – concerning various types of alleged pushbacks at Europe’s borders. In each of these cases rules of evidence were and remain at the forefront of effective human rights protection. Whereas the CJEU’s Grand Chamber engaged with the question of Frontex liability for contributions to pushbacks and returns in the appeals of WS and others v Frontex (see GC hearing), and Hamoudi v Frontex (see GC hearing), the Strasbourg Court ruled in A.R.E. and G.R.J. both versus Greece on the question of pushbacks at Europe’s southern borders, and held hearings in R.A. v Poland (see GC hearing), H.M.M. v Latvia (see GC hearing) and C.O.C.G. v Lithuania (see GC hearing) on the question of pushbacks and Belarusian instrumentalization of migratory flows at the borders of the respective states.