11 May 2026
Being Rejected is not a Crime
On 26 March 2026, the European Parliament approved the proposed EU Return Regulation, thereby adopting its position for the negotiations with the Council and the Commission. As the Parliament's and the Council's positions differ only marginally, its adoption appears likely. The current draft considerably expands detention and introduces far-reaching derogations, particularly for third-country nationals considered to pose security risks. This ICE-ification of the EU's migration policy and the de facto criminalisation of people on the move pose a threat to fundamental rights within the EU. Continue reading >>
2 
08 May 2026
But First, Implementation
Hungary's future Prime Minister Péter Magyar called on Chief Justice András Zs. Varga to resign, claiming that, together with the President of the Republic, the Prosecutor General, and other leaders of key state institutions, he is a “puppet” of Orbán’s regime. The claim to end Chief Justice Varga’s mandate is legitimate and the proper way to do so is by implementing the ECtHR's Baka judgment Continue reading >>
0
08 April 2026
Criminalization without Harm
On March 4, 2026, the Georgian Parliament passed yet another wave of anti-democratic changes to the Law on Grants and the Criminal Code. The law now criminalizes political expression if individuals or civil society organizations receive foreign support without prior government authorization. Beyond clear violations of freedom of expression and association, the Georgian case reveals a structural gap in criminal law theory and practice – the lack of substantive limits on criminalization. At the same time, the Georgian case shows that this need not be so: at least two concrete rules against criminalization emerge from the Georgian case. Continue reading >>
0
26 March 2026
Hollowing Out Human Rights
In less than two months, the Council of Europe is set to consider the adoption of a Political Declaration intended at “rebalancing” the European Convention on Human Rights in immigration contexts. These developments have implications for the connected rights commitments made under the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement of 1998. If the 1998 Agreement’s rights commitments start from, and extend beyond, the ECHR rights, this cannot be reconciled with efforts to water down those rights and shackle the interpretive role of the Strasbourg Court. Continue reading >>
0
13 March 2026
Sexual Citizenship via Free Movement
Yesterday, in the judgment of Shipov, the Court of Justice decided how EU citizenship can shape the recognition of gender identity within the Member States. Yet not through anti-discrimination law, but through the constitutional logic of free movement. The Court of Justice held that EU law precludes national legislation preventing a Union citizen from changing gender-related data in civil-status records in relation to the exercise of free movement. The Court thereby further expands the role of Union citizenship as a vehicle for protecting personal identity and dignity. Continue reading >>
0
06 March 2026
Patchwork Law (Love)
The ruling coalition came to power on a clear promise: to liberalize abortion law and introduce legal recognition for same-sex couples. A new bill on cohabitation agreements seeks to grant both same-sex and opposite-sex couples selected rights currently reserved for married spouses, aiming to make everyday family life easier while deliberately preserving a clear legal and symbolic distinction from marriage. The result is a piecemeal framework that risks creating second-class family relationships while leaving some key issues unresolved or overly complicated. Continue reading >>
0
03 March 2026
Free Speech, Protest and the High Court’s Ruling on the Proscription of Palestine Action
On 13 February, the High Court of England and Wales ruled that the UK government’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action did not follow the government’s own policy and was contrary to the rights to freedom of expression and assembly. The case highlights how proscription, a sweeping power “designed to ensure that an organisation ceases to exist”, significantly affects the rights of people outside the organisation. Given the breadth of the restriction, the court came to the right conclusion and provided an important safeguard for free speech and protest rights. Continue reading >>
0
24 December 2025
Tampering with the ECtHR
On Human Rights Day, the Secretary General of the Council of Europe convened an informal ministerial conference. The reason was that the ECtHR has come under pressure from its member states. Given the ongoing interference with the Court, I propose that the latter should define and apply contempt measures to sanction member states intruding on its independence and impartiality. States that publicly put political pressure on the Court, try to influence its judgments outside of proceedings, misrepresent its case law and role, or disrespect its authority, should face accountability under the ECHR. Continue reading >>15 December 2025
A Divided Response to Migration
On 10 December, the Council of Europe (CoE) ministers met to discuss proposals that could potentially recalibrate the treatment of migration-related issues under the European Convention on Human Rights. This meeting deliberately shifted a debate that had been unfolding in political arenas for months onto the Council’s formal institutional stage. While the formal conclusions call, in diplomatic terms, for a political declaration to be prepared for adoption in May 2026, a separate joint statement of 27 States Parties reveals a harsher line, illustrating the CoE’s internal divisions. Continue reading >>08 December 2025
AI and Human Rights at the European Court of Human Rights
The development of a legal framework for the use of AI is still at an early stage. Moving forward, it is necessary to take into account both the inherent features of the technology and the rights that come under pressure by our use of it. The approach of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) will have to be on a case-by-case basis, building on the Convention’s transversal values, applying existing jurisprudence as a stepping stone and making wise use of the “living instrument doctrine”. Continue reading >>
0