Search
Generic filters
07 January 2022

Pushbacks against the Child’s Best Interests

The lack of a functional EU-level legal framework, designed for high immigration numbers, contributed to increasing recourse to practices of dissuading migrants away from the EU territory. This did not leave the European Court of Human Rights indifferent and it decided to give a legal green light to pushbacks under certain conditions. The Court applies its jurisprudence equally to all individuals and in all situations. In doing so, however, it violates the principle of the child’s best interests. A more nuanced approach should be taken, guaranteeing special protection to children, in accordance with the principle of the child’s best interests. Continue reading >>
0
08 December 2021

No rule of law?

Something out of the ordinary, something very strange, something seriously concerning happened at the second section of the European Court of Human Rights on 23 November 2021. Continue reading >>
29 November 2021

The Honest (though Embarrassing) Coming-out of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal

The particular coming-out of the Tribunal, made in the judgment K 6/21 by admitting that the Constitutional Tribunal is not subject in general to the standards inherent in Article 6 EC, leads to the conclusion that the Polish Constitutional Tribunal and its judges need not be independent. Paradoxically, therefore, the judgment confirms (albeit by different reasoning) the disqualification of the Tribunal made in the Xero Flor judgment by ECtHR. And yet the Tribunal intended to remove the negative consequences for itself of the Xero Flor.  Continue reading >>
0
29 November 2021
,

M.H. v. Croatia: Shedding Light on the Pushback Blind Spot

In the recent judgment of M.H. v Croatia, the European Court of Human Rights has recognized for the first time the pushback of migrants and asylum-seekers from Croatia. The case centers around the death of six-year-old Afghan Madina Hussiny, who was struck by a train after she and her family members were denied access to asylum, instructed by police officers to follow train tracks towards Serbia and pushed back from Croatian territory without individualized examinations of their circumstances. Her tragic death in Croatia — like that of Alan Kurdi in Greece or of Mawda in Belgium — put European audiences face-to-face with the unjust and deadly impact of Europe’s immigration policies. Continue reading >>
11 November 2021

(Il-)Legal Gymnastics by Poland and Hungary in EU Border Procedures

This week, Poland has made headlines yet again for dispatching 12,000 guards to the border between Poland and Belarus and the use of tear gas to prevent third country nationals (TCNs), including children, from crossing into Polish territory. It is acutely problematic that Poland has foregone any semblance of conformity with EU law at all in the adoption of its domestic legislation on border procedures. Continue reading >>
09 November 2021

Stating the Obvious

On September 16th, the ECtHR has ruled in the case X v. Poland that the denial of custody of a child must not be based on the sexual orientation of a parent. According to the Court, Poland has violated Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) in conjunction with Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention of Human Rights when refusing the applicant full parental rights and custody of her youngest child. This ruling comes too late for the applicant, whose child has grown up, as the decision of the ECtHR took twelve years. Neverthelesess, in the current Polish context, the finding of the Court on this case sends an important message. Continue reading >>
0
04 November 2021

Yellow Light for Disciplining Inconvenient Judges?

The case of the disciplinary proceedings against the Bulgarian judge Miroslava Todorova (Requête no 40072/13) which has recently been examined by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) caught the eye of those following the rule of law decay in the European Union. On the surface, it appears that the recent ECtHR judgment on Todorova’s case is a mere example of the ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’ legal maxim – after all, the application was submitted in 2013 and the Court ruled against Bulgaria only in 2021. However, a closer look reveals that the ECtHR found in favor of Bulgaria on the two most worrisome questions. Continue reading >>
0
15 October 2021

Babiš’s Media

Just before the parliamentary elections on October 8 - 9 2021, the Czech populist Prime Minister Andrej Babiš banned a group of journalists from Czech and foreign media outlets from attending his press conference with Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán. It is telling of Babiš’s disregard for the rules of the democratic game. The erosion of freedom of press in Czechia continues, but the parliamentary election results might change the state of play. Continue reading >>
0
29 July 2021

Hundreds of judges appointed in violation of the ECHR?

On 22 July 2021, the European Court of Human Rights issued its third judgment concerning the rule of law crisis in Poland. In Reczkowicz v. Poland the Court ruled that the Disciplinary Chamber which dismissed the cassation complaint of the applicant did not meet the standard of a “right to a court established by law” guaranteed under Article 6 § 1 the Convention. The judgment is important not only because the ECtHR reviewed the status of the Disciplinary Chamber – a controversial body that was also the subject of a recent CJEU judgment – but also because it seems that the reasoning of the Court can be applied to hundreds of other newly appointed judges. Continue reading >>
28 July 2021
,

How Not to Deal with Poland’s Fake Judges’ Requests for a Preliminary Ruling

In his Opinion of 8 July 2021 in Case C-132/20 Getin Noble Bank, AG Bobek advised the Court of Justice to find admissible a national request for a preliminary ruling originating from an individual who was appointed to Poland’s Supreme Court on the back of manifest and grave irregularities. In this specific case, contrary to the position of AG Bobek, we submit that the ECJ must find the request inadmissible as the referring individual cannot be considered a tribunal established by law. Continue reading >>
Go to Top