“Why is the Icelandic Government choosing to remain silent?”

A heated exchange unfolded in Alþingi yesterday as Guðrún Hafsteinsdóttir, chairwoman of the Independence Party parliamentary group, challenged Prime Minister Kristrún Frostadóttir on Iceland’s position regarding a recent joint statement on immigration by several European leaders.

The statement — signed by the prime ministers of Denmark, Italy, and Poland, among others — calls for a reassessment of how the European Convention on Human Rights is interpreted in light of increasing security threats and challenges related to immigration policy.

“These are not fringe countries,” Hafsteinsdóttir said. “These are nations that have received large numbers of immigrants, faced serious challenges, and seen firsthand how judicial interpretations of international treaties can prevent the deportation of serious criminals. The statement is one of leadership — framed with respect for human rights, yet calling for a necessary conversation about the limits of those rights.”

"Why stay silent?"

Hafsteinsdóttir questioned why Iceland had not participated in the statement, asking whether this was a political choice and whether the government saw any need to review how international obligations may restrict deportations.

“Why is the Icelandic government choosing to remain silent while other European countries take a stand and speak openly about what many others are afraid to say?” she asked from the parliamentary podium.

“This is not the front line”

In response, Prime Minister Kristrún Frostadóttir stated that Iceland had not been invited to join the declaration and emphasized that the challenges Iceland faces relate more to domestic policy than international treaties.

“This is not the front line,” she said, noting that Iceland's main issues stem from implementation, not the European Convention on Human Rights itself. She pointed to several government-led initiatives already underway, including proposed legislation on passenger data and the revocation of international protection status.

Frostadóttir called for unity in Alþingi to advance those reforms, emphasizing that the government was aligned on the path forward.

“A policy of image over substance”

Hafsteinsdóttir was unsatisfied with the response, accusing the government of lacking political courage and clarity.

“While other nations show courage, pragmatism, and responsibility, Iceland chooses to abstain. This is a policy of image over substance — more about political self-preservation than real action,” she said.

“Let’s start with what we can do”

Frostadóttir concluded by urging Alþingi to focus on realistic, actionable steps within the existing framework.

“Shouldn’t we begin by finishing the work already on the table — such as building analysis and departure centers — before jumping to the idea of withdrawing from international human rights agreements?” she asked.

“We don’t need to abandon these treaties to address immigration challenges in this country.”