21 December 2023
Constitutional Identity vs. Human Rights
In two recent Latvian cases concerning the Russian-speaking minority decided respectively in September and November 2023, the ECtHR made clear that protection of constitutional identity has now been elevated to a legitimate aim for a differential treatment under the Convention. This post explores how the protection of constitutional identity has been deployed to enable a collective punishment by association with a former occupier, and how the ECtHR’s reasoning has effectively endorsed such a punishment, which is unbefitting of a liberal democratic system the ECHR aspires to represent. Until the three cases were decided, no liberal European democracy could argue without losing face that suppressing a large proportion of its population was its constitutional identity – one of the goals of its statehood. Today, this claim is seemingly kosher, marking a U-turn in the understanding of what the European human rights protection system is for minorities in Europe. Continue reading >>
0 
03 November 2023
The Right To Die Like The Trees: Standing
My name is dr. Dániel András Karsai. I am a human rights attorney. I am also terminally ill. In August 2022, I was diagnosed with ALS. ALS is a so-called motor neurone disease. ALS leads to an extremely humiliating life situation, increasingly depriving you of independence. For reasons unknown to medical science, this disease causes nerve cells that move the muscles to deteriorate, leading to muscle atrophy and ultimately complete paralysis. At the end of the disease, respiratory functions also cease, resulting in death by asphyxiation. The final stage of the disease is virtually a vegetative existence, without any possibility of conscious activity or communication. For me, this form of existence is devoid of all meaning and dignity. In this situation, I firmly believe in the arguable claim to demand the right to end my life with dignity instead of enduring meaningless suffering. Continue reading >>05 June 2023
Strasbourg’s Coming Out
On June 1st, in Maymulakhin and Markiv v. Ukraine, the ECtHR determined for the first time in clear terms that the general absence of legal recognition for same-sex couples is discriminatory and violates Article 14 of the European Convention of Human Rights. This marks a significant addition to the Court’s case-law concerning the rights of same-sex couples with implications for future litigation on this subject. Continue reading >>
0
05 May 2023
The UK vs the ECtHR
In recent months, the UK government has tabled two Bills - the Bill of Rights Bill and the Illegal Migration Bill - before Parliament which would have the consequence - and almost certainly have the intention - of setting the UK on a collision course with the Council of Europe, and especially the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). This post details how these Bills serve to undermine the UK’s obligations under the ECHR and explains their significance within the larger debate surrounding the UK’s possible withdrawal from the Convention. It places this debate in the context of the rarely-convened Council of Europe summit of heads of state and government in Reykjavik in May 2023, whose ambitious agenda is to protect the ‘common heritage’ of respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law in the face of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine and other existential threats. Continue reading >>
0
12 October 2022
Letting Human Rights Wait in Syrian Camps
Recently, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights handed down its decision about the repatriation of Daesh-involved family members of French citizens. The judgment has been widely commented on in the French and international press. The overall impression that emerged was that of a victory for the applicants and a clear denunciation of French policy regarding the general non-repatriation of French children and their mothers encamped in north-eastern Syria. Reality is, however, very different. In fact, the Court’s decision is very measured. In many respects, it does (too) little and comes (too) late. Continue reading >>
0
10 August 2022
The Future of European Climate Change Litigation
On 7 June 2022 the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) relinquished jurisdiction to the Grand Chamber to hear the application lodged on 28 January 2021 on behalf of Damien Carême, former mayor of the Commune of Grande Synthe in France. While the case shares some characteristics with other climate change cases pending before the Court, it differs in some key respects, making it a unique case of its kind at the moment. The Court will have to be open to a shift towards a more ecological interpretation of the Convention and demonstrate its ability and talent to rise to the historic task required. Continue reading >>
0
03 March 2022
Strasbourg Has No Chance and Uses It
On 28 February 2022, Ukraine lodged a request for interim measures against Russia before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Ukraine referred to “massive human rights violations being committed by the Russian troops in the course of the military aggression against the sovereign territory of Ukraine”. Within one day of the Ukrainian request, the Strasbourg Court granted “urgent interim measures” under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. Continue reading >>
0
03 December 2021
A Mugemangango v. Belgium Sequel in the Making
The 25 September 2021 parliamentary elections in Iceland were challenged due to alleged irregularities in the election process of the Northwest-constituency (Norðvesturkjördæmi). On 25 November 2021, the Icelandic Parliament ruled on the validity of the 25 September 2021 parliamentary elections. Individuals as well as a legal entity have stated their intent to file a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights for the alleged violations of the European Convention on Human Rights. If they go forward, they are likely to succeed as Icelandic law fails to meet the standards set out by the ECtHR for post-election review. Continue reading >>
0
12 April 2021
Is Compulsory Vaccination Compulsory?
On Thursday 8 April 2021, the European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment in Vavřička and others v. the Czech Republic. The Grand Chamber ruled strongly (16:1) in favour of the Czech government, granting the state a wide margin of appreciation in the assessment of the need for compulsory vaccination of children. In light of the COVID-related challenges, it is important that the Court took a clear stance regarding the importance of vaccination. At the same time, however, it is regrettable that the Court did not offer a stronger and more coherent reasoning justifying its value-driven decision. Continue reading >>
0
02 December 2020