10 March 2023
What is the Point of the UKās Illegal Migration Bill?
The introduction of the Illegal Migration Bill to the UK Parliament appears to be the latest outburst of the Conservative governmentās increasing hysteria with respect to the small boat crossings of the Channel in which Brexit-released fantasies of post-imperial sovereign power are acted out in the form of half-baked legislative proposals. The politically inconvenient fact that most of the 15% of asylum seekers who reach UK territory in this way are found to have legitimate asylum or protection claims seems to be a particular source of rage with a leaked Conservative Party email to party members under Suella Bravermanās name blaming āan activist blob of leftwing lawyers, civil servants and the Labour Partyā for boat crossings, which at least suggests she knows her audience. This is āBuild the Wallā for an island nation and, like Trumpās project, its primary value is as a fantasy object than a practical project. Continue reading >>
0 
02 March 2023
Barring Legal Gender Reassignment in Bulgaria
The Bulgarian Supreme Court of Cassation (SCC) has recently rejected the possibility for legal gender reassignment of transgender people. The SCC followed the approach of the Constitutional Court in framing its reasoning alongside the lines of the traditional social values. In doing so, the interpretative decision arguably undermined its own goal of unifying the future case-law by avoiding the discussion on the right to equal treatment of transgender persons and their protection from discrimination on the ground of their sexuality. Continue reading >>31 January 2023
Adapt or Die?
The year 2022 will be remembered as one of āterrible violence and seismic change in Europeā, in the words of the High Level Reflection Group established by the Council of Europe to consider the organisationās future. The Council of Europe has issued a public call for ideas, inviting input from international organisations, national human rights institutions, civil society organisations, academics, human rights defenders and others. The deadline for submissions is imminent ā 20 February ā and the need for radical thinking has never been greater. Continue reading >>
0
16 December 2022
The Slippery Slope of a Snooping Strasbourg
Last week, the ECtHR ruled in Spasov, for the first time, that there was a 'denial of justice' and thus a violation of Article 6(1) ECHR due to a manifest error of law by a national court regarding the interpretation and application of EU law. A Romanian court had convicted Mr Spasov, the owner and captain of a Bulgarian-flagged vessel, of illegal fishing inside Romaniaās exclusive economic zone. Spasov is an important principled judgment that further intertwines the EU and ECHR legal systems. Continue reading >>26 October 2022
Fighting for a Cause
On 18 October 2022, the European Court of Human Rights handed down its judgement in the case of MĆørck Jensen v. Denmark, upholding the applicantās conviction under Danish law of breaching the prohibition on entry into and stay in a conflict zone in order to participate in armed hostilities on the side of one party to an ongoing armed conflict. In its judgment, the Court consciously opted to take an objective or neutral stance towards the question of whether there may exist ārightā reasons to travel to a hot conflict zone in order to actively participate in armed activities. Continue reading >>
0
01 October 2022
Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger
Human rights courts can rarely avoid confrontation with backlashing states. This is particularly true for the two oldest and most prominent regional human rights courts, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). Yet, by close observation, we can witness that for both courts, backlash has triggered important institutional developments which will guide the work of human rights bodies in an increasingly polarized 21st century. Continue reading >>
0
30 September 2022
The ECtHRās Coping Strategy
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is operating in an increasingly challenging political and legal environment. Even if member states have stopped short of far-reaching reforms, they have signaled their collective desire for a more restrained Court, starting with the 2012 Brighton Declaration. Governments in established democracies, like the United Kingdom, have refused to implement or dragged-out implementation of ECtHR judgments. In some countries, government officials or major politicians have suggested exiting the Courtās jurisdiction altogether. Finally, several member states have rolled back domestic rights protections for politically unpopular groups, such as criminal defendants, suspected terrorists, asylum seekers, and non-traditional families. Continue reading >>22 July 2022
Citizenship Imposition is the New Non-Discrimination Standard
Never before has the failure to naturalize been used by the Court against discriminated permanent residents, just as it would be unthinkable to greenlight the humiliation of Muslims by an Islamophobic government for failure to convert. The meaning of ādiscriminationā in ECHR law has become less clear as a result of Savickis. Continue reading >>
0
19 July 2022
The Bill of Rights Bill and the damages of UKās unilateralism
Just a fortnight before the resignation of Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the UK Government published its draft Bill of Rights Bill, which seeks to repeal and amend the 1998 Human Rights Act which incorporated the ECHR into UK law (section 1(1) of the Bill). The Bill is an expression of a broader trend emerging in UK policies to unilaterally amend (or even avoid) international law commitments. Continue reading >>05 July 2022
The Costs of Outsourcing
Last month the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) granted an urgent interim measure according to Rule 39 of the Rules of the Court in a case concerning an imminent removal of an asylum-seeker from the UK to Rwanda. The UK's policy of outsourcing sets another dangerous precedence when it comes to restricting territorial asylum and the basic rights of asylum seekers. It is expensive, contrary to international human rights obligations, has significant adverse effects on those affected, scratches the stateĀ“s reputation, and increases existing tensions with the ECtHR. Continue reading >>
0