In this article, we scrutinise the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judgments issued in cases of border protection and pushbacks since 2016. We argue that these judgments issued amid political shifts on national and regional levels and mounting criticism of the Court have generated interconnected effects of (1) lowering the standards of protection of the people on the move; (2) shifting the emphasis from human rights protection at the border towards protection of the border; and (3) particularisation of rights protection by limiting protection of certain groups of people on the move. Such a process leads, as we argue, to undermining the Court's original mandate from primarily safeguarding individuals' human rights (the person-centric mandate) towards foregrounding the sovereignty of states.
Klaus et al. (2025) studied this question.