Webinar on ECtHR Climate Change Cases

On Friday 31 May (13:00-14:00 CET) the University of Göttingen is organizing a webinar entitled 'Climate Change and Human Rights: Exploring the ECHR’s KlimaSeniorinnen and Duarte Agostinho cases'. In the webinar, Corina Heri (Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Zurich) and Kata Dosza (Senior Associate Researcher and Adjunct Professor at the Brussels School of Governance) will be discussing the ECtHR's decisions in the cases of Duarte Agostinho and KlimaSeniorinnen.  The webinar is organized for students and academics interested in climate change and human rights, legal professionals, scholars, climate activists and NGO representatives, policymakers and governments officials, and anyone else interested in climate litigation and human rights. 

The webinar will cover the following topics:

- The legal frameworks and arguments in the Duarte Agostinho and KlimaSeniorinnen

cases.

- The ECHR's reasoning behind its decisions and their broader implications.

- Comparative analysis with other significant climate litigation cases.

- The evolving role of international human rights frameworks in addressing global

environmental challenges.

You can register here.

New President and Other Changes at the Court

Last week, the European Court of Human Rights announced a number of position changes in its internal organisation. Most pre-eminently, the Court elected its new President: Marko Bošnjak, the Court's judge in respect of Slovenia. Since 2022, he has been a vice-President of the Court and his term as a judge started in 2016, meaning it will end in 2025. His term as a President will thus be relatively short, following a pattern of the Court's Presidents of the last years - showing what a different type of institution the Court has become compared its early decades when Presidents served for many years on end in a parttime Court with much fewer cases. Judge Bošnjak succeeds the Court's current President Síofra O’Leary on 2 July 2024.

The election led to other shifts: Arnfinn Bårdsen, the judge in respect of  Norway, has been elected as Vice-President. And Ivana Jelić, the judge in respect of Montenegro, has been elected as new Section President. They will also take up their duties on 2 July. 

Good luck to all in their new positions! 

75 Years Council of Europe and Civil Society

In the week in which the Council of Europe celebrates its 75th anniversary (founded on 5 May 1949) - a full and bilingual timeline is available here - two civil society initiatives were undertaken:

The first is the presentation to states of the 'Civil Society Evaluation of the Progress of Implementation of the Reykjavík Summit Commitments by the Council of Europe and Its Member States' one year after the Reykjavik Summit'. This document, compiled under the auspices of CURE (Campaign to Uphold Rights in Europe) is the outcome of a process (in which the founder of this blog also participated) in which both the steps taken so far by states to implement the Reykjavik Declaration were compiled as well as the steps that still need to be taken were identified. In terms of the issue of implementation of judgments of the Court, the document acknowledges some important progress on technical, budgetary and procedural matters, but simultaneously urges states not to lose sight of the core of the matter: 'ensuring a stronger political follow-up to cases of non-implementation' by the Committee of Ministers and CoE institutions.

Secondly, a group of over 400 civil society organisations have joined forces to call upon Council of Europe to add a protocol to the ECHR with a right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, following upon a report adopted by PACE earlier last month. More organisations can join the call here.

New Special Issue ECHR Law Review

The first issue of the year of the ECHR Law Review has just been published (Vol. 5, Issue 1). This time it is a special issue entitled 'The ‘Special’ Relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Convention of Human Rights'. The special issue focuses specifically on the question of what the consequences would be if the UK decides to withdraw from the ECHR. The issue contains one editorial note and nine research articles. This is the table of contents:

* Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou, 'The United Kingdom and the European Convention on Human Rights: Together Until the End?'

* Merris Amos, 'Reality Amidst Rhetoric: Implementation of ECtHR Judgments in the UK'

* Ed Bates, 'UK Withdrawal From the echr (‘BrECHRit’): From Taboo to Tenable?'

* Frederick Cowell, 'Locking in Human Rights: An Exploration of the Barriers to ECHR Withdrawal'

* Lewis Graham, 'Boldness, Caution, Avoidance: Recent Cases Against the UK Before the European Court of Human Rights'

* Paul Johnson, 'UK Withdrawal From the European Convention on Human Rights: A Disaster for lGBT People'

* Natasa Mavronicola, 'Facilitating (Further) Inhumanity: On the Prospect of Losing Article 3 echr, a Vital Guarantee for the Under-Protected'

* Valsamis Mitsilegas and Elspeth Guild, 'The UK and the ECHR After Brexit: The Challenge of Immigration Control'

* Patricia Popelier, 'What’s Cooking? General Measures in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights'

* Stuart Wallace, 'Military Operations and Withdrawal From the European Convention on Human Rights'

Seminar on Procedural Costs and the ECtHR

On Friday 31 May from 12:00-13:15, the Faculty of Law of Lund University is organizing a seminar entitled 'The Costs Policy of the European Court of Human Rights: From Judicialisation to Judicial Restraint'. In the seminar, Ezgi Özlü (Postdoctoral researcher at the Luxembourg Center of European Law of the University of Luxembourg) will be presenting her PhD on the Costs Policy of the European Court of Human Rights. This is a short description of the seminar:

'This seminar will examine how the policy of costs at the European Court of Human Rights affects the nature of the cases brought before it. The main focus is on legal aid and the reimbursement of costs and expenses mechanisms. Eminent for the protection and promotion of human rights in Europe, both of these mechanisms have been developed in parallel with the gradual inclusion of the individual to the proceedings. Through the judicialisation process, with the broad use of the ‘equity’ principle, the Court has adopted a flexible approach. Nevertheless, managerialism and self-restraint have weakened this policy. The application of a single scale for legal aid, formalist assessment of reimbursement criteria, automatisation in decision-making, and dependence on member States demonstrate how the current costs policy limits the scope of individual application. This restriction, however, also limits the powers of the Court.'

You can participate via Zoom: https://lu-se.zoom.us/j/64236572774

New Book: 'European Human Rights Grey Zones'

Andrew Forde (Irish Centre for Human Rights, University of Galway) has just published a new book with Cambridge University Press entitled European Human Rights Grey Zones: The Council of Europe and Areas of Conflict. The book explores the effectiveness of the Council of Europe's human rights protection mechanism in European areas of conflict. This is the abstract:

'Forde examines the effectiveness of the human rights system of the Council of Europe (CoE) in conflict-affected regions and advances a novel approach to understanding how the European Convention on Human Rights can better serve the 10+ million rights-holders living in so-called human rights 'grey zones'. Building on the premise that nowhere in Europe should be deprived of access to Europe's human rights architecture, Forde argues that areas of conflict give rise to a collective public order imperative on Member States to seek maximal effectiveness of the CoE human rights system. Despite Kosovo's sui generis status, much of the CoE's experience of engagement with Kosovo could inspire more proactive efforts in relation to other areas of conflict. This book advocates a judicious engagement of the CoE's unique assets and acquis in affected regions based on the collective responsibility of Member States and the normative will of the Secretary General.'

New Judges Elected

Last week, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), elected three new judges to the European Court of Human Rights, in respect of Ireland, Latvia, and Liechtenstein. 

In respect of Ireland, Úna Ní Raifeartaigh was elected. She is currently a judge of the Court of Appeal of Ireland as well as being an ad hoc/substitute judge for the European Court of Human Rights. Before these functions, she was a longtime practising barrister, with an emphasis on criminal law. She has also taught at Trinity College Dublin and has a researcher for the Law Reform Commission. She thus has a very broad knowledge of the law, including the ECHR, from a wide range of professional perspectives. She will succeed the current judge in respect of Ireland, President Síofra O’Leary, whose term as a judge will end within a few months.

In respect of Liechtenstein, Alain Chablais has been elected. Maybe somewhat curiously to outsiders, he is the current Government Agent of Switzerland (not Liechtenstein) before the European Court of Human Rights as well as before a number of UN treaty bodies. In itself not a novelty of course, as the judges in respect of Liechtenstein have been from other states before, Mr Chablais has Swiss and French nationality. Previously, he has been a judge at the Swiss Federal Administrative Court, worked for the Swiss Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and has for a full decade been a member of staff at the Directorate General of Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Council of Europe, amongst others with the Venice Commission and the Secretariat of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. More recently, as the  Swiss Government Agent, he has participated in the work of the CDDH, the Steering Committee for Human Rights, including presiding over its Committee of Experts on the System of the ECHR, as well as being involved in the negotiations around the European Union's accession to the ECHR. No stranger to Strasbourg thus!

And in respect of Latvia, Artūrs Kučs was elected. Currently, he is a judge of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia as well as an ad hoc judge of the European Court of Human Rights. He is also associate professor at the Faculty of Law of the University of Latvia, where he led its Human Rights Institute in the past, and in his academic capacity for many years he was the Latvian representative (national director) in the EMa programme, the European Master's in Human Rights and Democratisation. In addition, he has trained judges and has worked for the Ombudsman of Latvia. Finally, he is a Member of the Management Board of the Fundamental Rights Agency and an Alternate Member of the Venice Commission. Another well-versed new judge in the many professional shapes legal work can take as well as being very familiar with the ECHR system.

Judges are elected for terms of nine years. Congratulations to the newly elected ones!

Recording of Climate Cases Webinar

A recording of the webinar of 19 April 2024, 'Climate Change in Strasbourg: the recent cases at the European Court of Human Rights', co-organised by this ECHR Blog and the Netherlands Institute of Human Rights (SIM), is now available here for those who missed it or want to watch it again. A big thank you to all participants for their attendance and incisive questions and especially to our three expert speakers: Gerry Liston, Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh, and Ole Windahl Pedersen!

New Session of MOOC on ECHR Starts Again on 4 May

On  4 May 2024 Utrecht University's free Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) on the ECHR will start again! Registration is open now. To enroll, please go to the Coursera platform. 

The MOOC entitled 'Human Rights for Open Societies - An introduction into the ECHR' is taught by my Utrecht University colleagues professor Antoine Buyse and professor Janneke Gerards. This is the description of our six-week course:

'Human rights are under pressure in many places across the globe. Peaceful protests are violently quashed. Voting is tampered with. And minorities are often excluded from decision-making. All of this threatens the ideal of an open society in which each of us can be free and participate equally. A solid protection of human rights is needed for an open society to exist and to flourish. But it is often an uphill battle to work towards that ideal. Equip yourself and learn more about what human rights are and how they work. 

In this course, we will introduce you to one of the world’s most intricate human rights systems: the European Convention on Human Rights. You will see when and how people can turn to the European Court of Human Rights to complain about human rights violations. You will learn how the Court tries to solve many of the difficult human rights dilemmas of today. We will look, amongst other things, at the freedom of expression and demonstration, the right to vote, and the prohibition of discrimination. And we will address the rights of migrants, refugees, and other vulnerable groups. And, of course, we will see whether it is possible to restrict rights and if so under what conditions. You will even encounter watchdogs and ice cream in this course. We invite you to follow us on a journey of discovery into the European Convention!'

Please watch this short introduction video to get an impression:

ECHR Blog Special Webinar: Climate Change in Strasbourg

On Friday 19 April  (15h00 to 16h30 CET), the ECHR Blog and the Netherlands Institute of Human Rights (SIM) are co-organising a special webinar entitled 'Climate Change in Strasbourg: the recent cases at the European Court of Human Rights'. 

Last week, we already gave our first impressions when the European Court of Human Rights issued its Grand Chamber decisions and judgment in three keenly awaited climate change cases. Two cases were declared inadmissible, but the Swiss Klimaseniorinnen won their case in two crucial respects: the Court found violations of their right to private life under article 8 ECHR and of access to court under Article 6 ECHR. 

The webinar will focus on these important, already historic rulings of the Court. Why did the Swiss case lead to a judgment finding violations of the ECHR and did the two others not reach the merits phase? What standards of protection and admissibility requirements has the Court set with regards to climate change? What should national courts and other authorities do to comply with the Court’s standards on climate change? What could be the impact of the Swiss judgment outside Europe? How does the judgment fit in wider trends of climate litigation. These are some of the questions that will be discussed by a panel of eminent academics and practitioners working on human rights and climate change.   

The speakers of the webinar include Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh, Associate Professor of Sustainability of Law at the University of Amsterdam; Ole Windahl Pedersen, Professor of Environmental Law at Aarhus University; and Gerry Liston, senior lawyer with the Global Legal Action Network in the Portuguese Youth Climate case. The webinar will be moderated by Antoine Buyse and Kushtrim Istrefi, editors of the ECHR Blog.

If you wish to join the webinar (which will be held on the MS Teams platform), please register here.

Date: Friday 19 April

Time: 15h00-16h30 CET