Thursday, 16 December 2010

Lawyer's Guide on ECHR Admissibility Criteria

Connected to yesterday's post, the Court has launched another post-Interlaken initiative to try and stem the influx of new applications: a Partical Guide on ECHR admissibility criteria. The very elaborate document (over a 100 pages) is a clearly structured overview of the Court's admissibility criteria, with links in the document to the relevant jurisprudence. As the Court's president Costa said: "This handbook will enable lawyers to properly advise their clients on their chances of bringing an admissible case to the European Court of Human Rights. It will save them time, energy and unnecessary expense and it will free the Court to fulfil its vital role, judging serious and important cases to improve human rights protection for over 800 million people." One may hope he is right, but these efforts of information are no panacea for the Court's problems as a comment to yesterday's post rightly emphasized. Information is one thing, willingness to reconsider to apply is another. Still, it is a starting point which necessitates further training at the national level by national bar associations and during the education of lawyers.

For the moment the Guide is available in both French and English and there will be versions in Turkish and russian later on. Hopefully, other countries from which many applications come will decide to translate the guide into their own national languages.

Wednesday, 15 December 2010

Ten New Case-Law Fact Sheets

In order to stem the flood of applications and to make the Court's jurisprudence better known, the Court has been posting so-called fact sheets on its website. These are thematic sheets with the main relevant cases in short summaries. Last week the Court added ten new sheets to the existing ones. They relate to the following issues: children’s rights, collective expulsions, conscientious objection, protection of journalists’ sources, racial discrimination, right to one’s own image, social welfare, trade union rights, transsexuals’ rights, and violence against women. The Court promises regular updates and therefore has also included pending cases.

Monday, 13 December 2010

Farewell Seminar for Judge Christos Rozakis

The Athens Bar Association and the Greek Ministry of Justice, Transparency and Human Rights are organising a seminar at the occasion of the retirement of the Greek judge Christos Rozakis from the European Court of Human rights. The event will take place on Monday 20 December and is entitled 'The Protection of the Individual Within the European Legal Order'.

Time and venue: 18h30 in the Ceremony Hall of the Athens Bar Association (Akadimias str. 60, 1st floor).

Speakers will be:

-Vassileios Skouris, Chairman of the European Court of Justice: “The Judicial Protection of the Citizen within the European Union”;
-Ioannis Tentes, Attorney General: “Effects of ECHR and the jurisprudence of EuCHR on Greek Criminal Law”;
-Nikiforos Diamantouros, European Ombudsman: “The Ombudsman as a mechanism of extrajudicial protection of the individuals within the European Legal Order”;
-Marialena Tsirli, Référendaire of the European Court of Human Rights: “Local jurisdiction of the EuCHR: Geographical Limits of the European Protection of Human Rights”;
-Panagiotis Voyatzis, Référendaire of the European Court of Human Rights: “The Consequences of Strasbourg Judgments within Legal Time”;
and the honoree Christos Rozakis: “The Completion of European Protection with the accession of the European Union to ECHR”.

Book on Extraterritorial Reach of ECHR Wins Award

Last Friday, on human rights day, Michal Gondek's book 'The Reach of Human Rights in a Globalizing World: Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties', was awarded the Max van der Stoel PhD Thesis Award at Tilburg University. A large part of the book is dedicated to the extraterritorial reach of the European Convention on Human Rights. This is the abstract:

In the globalizing world of today, the conduct of states often affects the human rights of persons situated outside of those states’ territories. The problem of applying human rights to such state conduct has become increasingly topical as a result of phenomena such as the ‘war on terror’, foreign military interventions and economic globalization. The controversies as regards the applicability of human rights treaty law in such cases stem mainly from the wording of the relevant treaty provisions. The principal treaties on civil and political rights require states to guarantee certain human rights to persons ‘within their jurisdiction’, while treaties on economic, social and cultural rights specifically envisage international cooperation of states parties for the purposes of achieving these rights. The meaning of ‘jurisdiction’ and the precise nature and content of the obligation of international cooperation are subject to debate.

This study explores the question of extraterritorial application of principal universal and regional human rights treaties. It covers treaties on civil and political rights as well as those on economic, social and cultural rights. The study seeks to determine to what extent and under which circumstances human rights treaties are applicable to state conduct which affects the human rights of persons situated outside the borders of the state party in question. The problem is analyzed by reference to the rules of treaty interpretation and in the conceptual framework of public international law. It contains thorough analysis of preparatory works of the relevant treaties, the case law of the International Court of Justice and of human rights courts on the subject, as well as other output of human rights treaty bodies. State practice, including the case law of national courts, is also explored. The study argues for a flexible approach to extraterritorial application of human rights treaties, which would make it possible for the human right systems to respond to the challenges posed by the ever more notorious extraterritorial state conduct.
The table of contents can be found here. Congratulations, Michal!

Thursday, 9 December 2010

My New Book on Margins of Conflict and the ECHR

Dear readers, allow me to highlight a book edited by myself, which has just been published with Intersentia Publishers in their Transitional Justice Series: "Margins of Conflict. The ECHR and Transitions to and from Armed Conflict". The book is the result of a seminar organised at the Netherlands Institute of Human Rights SIM of Utrecht University last year, in the context of its research focus on conflicts and human rights. I am very grateful for the collaboration of a number of leading ECHR experts in this book, both from Utrecht and from Leiden. The introduction was written by the Dutch judge at the European Court, Egbert Myjer. This is the abstract:

The European Convention on Human Rights was drafted in the wake of World War II. The dark shadows of war have never fully receded from Europe however. Armed conflict has resurged time and again, from Northern Ireland to Cyprus and Turkey, and from the former Yugoslavia to the Caucasus. This book focuses on the margins of conflict: human rights aspects of transitions from peace to armed conflict and vice versa. Firstly, it seeks to explore what limits human rights put on European societies which are on the brink of armed conflict. Secondly, it surveys the consequences of human rights violations committed during the armed conflict by looking at the aftermath of war. In a stimulating way, experts in their field offer food for thought on a broad range of material and especially procedural issues such as the territorial scope of the Convention, states of emergency, freedom of expression and conflict escalation, obligations relating to enforced disappearances, interim measures, and pilot judgments. Taken together, they reflect both the potential and limitations of human rights in the run-up to conflicts and their aftermath.
The table of contents can be found here. Recommended (how could I say otherwise)!

Tuesday, 7 December 2010

Working Paper on 'Nullum Crimen, Nulla Poena Sine Lege'

For those readers who read French: Hélène Tigroudja of Artois University has posted a working paper on SSRN on the principle of 'Nullum Crimen, Nulla Poena Sine Lege' in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights: International Crimes and the Principle 'Nullum Crimen, Nulla Poena Sine Lege' (Crimes de Droit International et Principe 'Nullum Crimen, Nulla Poena Sine Lege'). As the very succinct summary provides: Critical Overview of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights dedicated to Article 7 of the ECHR in cases of prosecutions of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide (Kononov case).

Friday, 3 December 2010

Protection Against Domestic Violence Extended

This week, the European Court of Human Rights re-emphasized state obligations to protect victims of domestic violence in the case of Hajduová v. Slovakia. The case concerned a mother who had been verbally and physcially attacked by her husband - attacks which included death threats.

The Court seems to extend state duties under Article 8 ECHR (protection of private life). Whereas in the landmark case of Opuz v Turkey Article 8 had been violated because of domestic violence which had already occurred, in Hajduová the emphasis was on the real risk of future violence, even if it did not materialise in fact:

49. The Court observes that the instant application is distinguishable from the cases to which it has referred concerning domestic violence resulting in death (see, in particular, the Court's judgments in the cases of Kontrová v. Slovakia, no. 7510/04, ECHR 2007-VI (extracts) and Opuz cited above, in which it found violations of Articles 2 and 13 and Articles 2, 3 and 14 of the Convention respectively). It is clear that A.'s repeated threats following his release from hospital, which constitute the basis of the applicant's complaint under Article 8 of the Convention, did not actually materialise into concrete acts of physical violence (compare and contrast the case of Bevacqua, cited above, in which the Court found that the State had breached its positive obligations under Article 8). Notwithstanding, the Court considers that given A.'s history of physical abuse and menacing behaviour towards the applicant, any threats made by him would arouse in the applicant a well-founded fear that they might be carried out. This, in the Court's estimation, would be enough to affect her psychological integrity and well-being so as to give rise to an assessment as to compliance by the State with its positive obligations under Article 8 of the Convention.
Real vigilance and concrete action bu states is thus called for in such cases. The press release on the judgment can be found here.

Wednesday, 1 December 2010

PhD Workshop on Legacy and Future of ECHR

The School of Law of University College Dublin is organising a workshop entitled 'The Legacy and Future of the ECHR: Evaluating Sixty Years of the European Human Rights Project' on 1-2 April 2011. Although it is primarily intended for PhD researchers, other (young) researchers are also invited to submit abstracts. Here is the full information:

The organising committee of the 2011 PhD Workshop on Human Rights in University College Dublin School of Law invite proposals for a workshop to be held 1st-2nd of April on the theme of ‘The Legacy and Future of the ECHR: Evaluating Sixty Years of the European Human Rights Project’.

This interdisciplinary workshop seeks submissions from a legal, political, philosophical, socio-scientific or interdisciplinary perspective that critically evaluate the role of the European Convention on Human Rights over the past sixty years and the impact it will have on the future European landscape. This dynamic, intensive workshop aims to stimulate debate on both the successes and the limitations of the ECHR. The workshop will take a plenary form, with established academics specialist in the field acting as discussants to participants’ papers.

Papers are invited on the themes such as, but not limited to, the following:

• The role and structure of the European Court of Human Rights, especially in light of the Interlaken Declaration
• The relationship between the EU and the ECHR, particularly in the light of the Lisbon Treaty
• The challenges to the ECHR posed by socio-economic needs, environmental crises, security (including human security), and the ever-increasing workload of the Court
• The broader role of the Council of Europe

Applicants are asked to submit an abstract of no more than 400 words on their proposed papers. We are delighted to announce that selected papers will be published (subject to editorial review) in a special edition of the German Law Journal. In addition the Irish Society for International Law will present a prize for the best paper.

The deadline for submission of abstracts is Friday 11th February 2011. Successful applicants shall be notified no later than 2 weeks of this date.

Justice John Hedigan of the Irish High Court, and former Judge of the European Court of Human Rights, will deliver the keynote address and Mr Michael O’Boyle, Deputy Registrar of the European Court of Human Rights will speak at the event.

We regret that we are not in a position to offer financial support for travel to the conference or for accommodation.

Abstracts should be submitted to Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou and Alan Greene at ucd.echr.conference@gmail.com

Monday, 29 November 2010

New issues IAEHR Journal and HRLR

Two human rights journals have just released their newest issues. Please find an overview here of the articles that relate to the ECHR. The latest issue of the Human Rights Law Review (vol. 10 , no. 4 , 2010) includes:

* Thérèse Murphy and Gearóid Ó Cuinn, 'Works in Progress: New Technologies and the European Court of Human Rights':

A field—new technologies and human rights or, more broadly, law and technology—is in the process of being framed. Should the European Court of Human Rights be seen as part of that process? To find out, we searched the Court's case law using HUDOC, a database on the Council of Europe website which contains both judgments and admissibility decisions. We entered 155 keywords, all in English, and in this article we report and analyse what we found. The overall conclusion is twofold: first, it is too early to attempt a complete characterisation of the Court's position on new technologies; and second, the Court is however ‘one to watch’.
The just published latest edition of the Inter-American and European Human Rights Journal (vol. 2, no. 1-2, 2009), a bilingual English/Spanish-language journal, includes:

* Dirk Voorhoof, 'Freedom of Expression under the European Human Rights System'
* Giovanni Bonello, 'Evidentiary Rules of the ECHR in Proceedings Relating to Articles 2, 3 and 14 - A Critique'
* Egbert Myjer and Peter Kempees, 'Notes on Reparations under the European Human Rights System'
* Laurence Burgorgue-Larsen, 'Interim Measures in the European Convention System of Protection of Human Rights'

Friday, 26 November 2010

Interpretative Authority of ECtHR Judgments

A strong plea for the interpretative authority of Europea Court judgments. That is what PACE rapporteur Christos Pourgourides delivered last month at a conference in Skopje. He convincingly argued that one of the key ways to prevent repetitive applications to the Court and to prevent human violations in general is for state parties to take the res interpretata of the Court's judgments more seriously, even if it concerns judgments relating to other countries. He mentions two situations to illustrate his point:

The Court held as early as in 1979, in Marckx v. Belgium, that children born out of wedlock must not be discriminated. French law was similarly discriminatory. But the necessary changes were made only after France herself was condemned by the Court in the case of Mazurek v. France, in 2000! It was obvious, already back in 1979, what the Court’s position would be. Twenty years lost for the victims of such discrimination, and many years of unnecessary litigation before the Court in Strasbourg.

The second example concerns my own country: whilst the Court had already decided in 1981, in Dudgeon v. the United Kingdom, that homosexual acts between consenting adults must not be criminalised, Cyprus waited until the Modinos v. Cyprus judgment in 1993 to finally decriminalise such acts – and even then, I recall it well,
without much enthusiasm.
The speech is available online here. The speech is followed by a very informative compilation of background materials on the interpretative authority of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, with key extracts from relevant cases, but also a very elaborate overview of examples of national laws and domestic court cases which illustrate acceptance of res interpretata of the Strasbourg Court. Highly recommended!