Ricerc@Sapienza

The article concerns the recent ECtHR judgment of N.D. and M.T. v Spain, where the Court dealt with push back practices carried out by the Spanish border police at its territorial border with Morocco, namely Melilla. The judgment is highly relevant as the Court deals with the matter for the first time. Moreover, the judgment seems to represent a turning point for the Court's case-law on collective expulsion, as the Court applies a somehow conservative reasoning once faced with judging the State for a violation of the Convention. In this light, the commentary is structured as follows: it explains the facts originating the case. Secondly, it summarises the Court’s reasoning for not finding a violation of Article 4 Protocol 4, overturning the third section decision. Thirdly, it isolates and deals with two elements of the reasoning showing a degree of contradiction, which are also highly revealing of the Court’s conservative turn. Moreover, it examines the relation between the judgment and its outcomes on Article 3 ECHR. Finally, it tries to read the decision within the context of more structural tendencies in immigration law and policies, with the attempt of claiming how such a securitarian turn is not a “surprise”, given the bigger context in which the Court is operating.