This article investigates the different approaches of the ECtHR as regards the non refoulement prohibition of Article 3 and the prohibition of collective expulsion under Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 of the Convention. In its decisions since the Hirsi Jamaa judgment, the Court increasingly seems to be less aware of the fact that effective access to asylum procedures cannot be guaranteed when standards prohibiting collective expulsions – forming the vestibule to asylum and thus non refoulement – are watered down. Ultimately, by attributing the lack of individual removal decisions and pushbacks to applicants’ own (culpable) conduct, it is argued that potential asylum seekers might be limited in their procedural guarantees under the ECHR.

Based on online ethnographic fieldwork, this contribution conceptualizes pushback practices at the Evros border as a strategy of crimmigration that targets migrants and their supporters. The political tensions between Greece and Turkey are discussed as a driver of the normalization of pushbacks. New levels of violence and repression in this context point to an increasingly authoritarian spirit. By examining the complex interactions between the different state and non-state actors who shape the politics of visibility surrounding pushbacks in Greece, the article aims to challenge the dehumanizing discourses around migrants as either passive victims of geopolitical strategies or potential security threats.