report on the rule 39 interim measures in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. As opposed to the quantitative figures on such measures, which can be found in the Court's annual reports, this report reflects qualitative research by examinimng the experiences of lawyers submitting requests for interim measures, and where appropriate, the European Court of Human Rights' response and the compliance of Member States of the Council of Europe to such measures. As the authors put it in their press release:
The new report highlights the crucial role of Rule 39 in safeguarding the rights of those in need of international protection as an interim measure, particularly in the context of deportation and expulsion procedures. It documents the experience of legal practitioners in submitting requests to the European Court of Human Rights under Rule 39 and also reveals why such recourse to the Court is necessary to protect those at risk of a violation of their human rights.
The key findings of the research are as follows:
- There is a lack of effective national legal remedies in a number of Member States;
- The practice of accelerated procedures is placing persons at risk of refoulement;
- The right to individual petition and access to the Court is being circumvented through a variety of obstacles at the national level;
- Instances of non-compliance of Rule 39 indications are reported in a number of Member States which have led to persons being deported to countries where they are at risk of torture or other ill-treatment.