Finland’s new law to combat instrumentalised migration has sparked controversy with its far-reaching provisions. The law, enacted in response to a surge of migrants coerced by Russian authorities to cross the border, allows border guards to prevent asylum seekers from entering Finnish territory and refuse their applications for protection in exceptional situations of instrumentalisation.
Critics have raised concerns about the law’s violations of refugee rights, such as the principle of non-refoulement and the prohibition of collective expulsions. The Finnish government defends the law as necessary to address national security threats posed by instrumentalised migration, but experts and organizations argue that it sets a dangerous precedent and puts vulnerable individuals at risk.
Despite the criticism, the law passed with a large majority in the Finnish parliament and went into effect in July. The European Commission, responsible for ensuring compliance with EU norms, has yet to comment on the law, prompting speculation about political motivations within the EU.
Legal scholars and human rights advocates have denounced the law as a breach of international obligations and have called for its revision. They argue that Finland should uphold its commitment to refugee protection and respect human rights standards, instead of legalizing pushback and potentially endangering the lives of asylum seekers.
The law’s implications for border management and refugee rights are being closely monitored, with concerns about its impact on vulnerable individuals and the erosion of established legal norms. The debate over Finland’s approach to instrumentalised migration reflects broader tensions in Europe surrounding border security, human rights, and international obligations.
Source
Photo credit www.euronews.com
