European Court of Human Rights

European Court of Human Rights
Established	1959 (initially) 1998 (permanent)
Jurisdiction	47 member states of the Council of Europe
Location	Strasbourg, France
Authorized by	European Convention on Human Rights
Decisions are appealed to	Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights
Number of positions	47 judges in respect of 47 member states of the Council of Europe
Website	http://echr.coe.int
President
Currently	Jean-Paul Costa
Since	1998
Jurist term ends	2010

The European Court of Human Rights (French: Cour européenne des droits de l’homme) in Strasbourg is an international judicial body, established under the European Convention on Human Rights of 1950 to monitor respect of human rights by European member states. The European Convention on Human Rights, or formally named Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, is a convention adopted by the Council of Europe. All 47 member states of the Council of Europe are parties to the Convention. Applications against Contracting Parties for human rights violations can be brought before the Court by other states, other parties or individuals.

History and structure

A piece of the Berlin Wall in front of the European Court of Human Rights

The Court was instituted as a permanent entity with full-time judges on 1 November 1998, replacing the then existing enforcement mechanisms, which included the European Commission of Human Rights (created in 1954) and the European Court of Human Rights, which had been created in 1959.

The new format of the Court was the result of the ratification of Protocol 11, an amendment to the Convention that was ratified in November 1998. The new full-time judges were subsequently elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

By the time Protocol No. 11 entered into force on 1 November 1998 establishing a full-time Court and opening up direct access for 800 million Europeans, the Court had delivered 837 judgments. By the end of 2005 it had delivered 5,968 judgments.

All member states of the Council of Europe are required to sign and ratify the Convention. The Court consists of a number of judges equal to the number of Contracting Parties, which currently stand at 47. Each judge is elected in respect of a Contracting Party by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Despite this correspondence, however, there are no nationality requirements for judges (e.g. a Swiss national may be elected in respect of Liechtenstein). Judges are assumed to be impartial arbiters, rather than representatives of any country. Judges are elected to six-year terms and may be re-elected.

The Court is divided into five "Sections", each of which consists of a geographic and gender-balanced selection of justices. The entire Court elects a President and five Section Presidents, two of whom also serve as Vice-Presidents; all terms last for three years. Each section selects a Chamber, which consists of the Section President and a rotating selection of six other justices. The Court also maintains a 17-member Grand Chamber, which consists of the President, Vice-Presidents, and Section Presidents, in addition to a rotating selection of justices from one of two balanced groups. The selection of judges alternates between the groups every nine months.

Between 2006 and 2010, Russia had been the only one of 47 participating states to refuse to ratify Protocol 14, which was intended to accelerate the court’s work, partly by reducing the number of judges required to make important decisions. In 2010, Russia ended its opposition to the protocol, in exchange for a guarantee that Russian judges would be involved in reviewing complaints against Russia.^[1]

Procedure

Court room of the ECoHR

Complaints of violations by member states are filed in Strasbourg, and assigned to a Section. Unmeritorious complaints are dismissed by a committee of three judges by a unanimous vote. Meritorious complaints are examined by a Chamber. Decisions of great importance may be appealed to the Grand Chamber. Any decision of the Court is binding on the member states and must be complied with,^[2] except if it consists of an advisory opinion^[3]

It is the role of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to supervise the execution of Court judgments. This body cannot force states to comply, and the ultimate sanction for non-compliance is expulsion from the Council of Europe.

In 1999 the court had a backlog of 60,000 cases, growing to about 100,000 cases in 2007.^[4][5] In early 2010 the court had a backlog of over 120,000 cases and a multi-year waiting list.^{[6] [7] [8]} About 1 out of every 20 cases submitted to the court is considered admissible.^[9] In 2007 the court issued 1,503 verdicts. At the current rate of proceedings, it would take 46 years for the backlog to clear.^[10]

Judges and sections

The court has 5 sections and the 47 judges are selected from the member states of the Council of Europe.

The Plenary Court elects the Registrar and one or more Deputy Registrars. The Registrar is the head of the Registry, which performs legal and administrative tasks and drafts decisions and judgments on behalf of the Court. The Registrar and Deputy Registrar as of 4 January 2007^[11] are:

• Erik Fribergh, Registrar ( Sweden)
• Michael O'Boyle, Deputy Registrar ( Ireland)

Reform

Due to the increase in awareness of European citizens of their rights under the Convention, the Court became a victim of its own success.^[12] Some cases were taking up to five years before being decided and there was a significant backlog. For example, according to the Human Rights Information Bulletin(issued by the Council of Europe), between 1 November 2003 and 29 February 2004 the Court dealt with 7,315 cases, of which 6,255 were declared inadmissible to help reduce the backlog.

For 2008 the Court reported that it had made 1543 judgments and that over 32,000 cases were declared inadmissible. With over 94% of cases analysed being declared inadmissible the Court has de facto moved away from its mission of protecting individual human rights and moved towards concentrating on only issues of wider legal importance, per its 2008 annual report.

Working on the principle that 'justice delayed is justice denied', the Council of Europe set up a working party to consider ways of improving the efficiency of the Court. This resulted in an amendment to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Protocol 14. This new protocol, which requires universal ratification by all Council of Europe member states to come into force, makes a number of changes:

• A single judge can decide on a case's admissibility; currently, three judges decide.
• Where cases are broadly similar to ones brought previously before the Court, and are essentially due to a member state failing to change its domestic law to correct a failing highlighted by that previous judgment, the case can be decided by three judges rather than the seven-judge Chamber.
• A case may not be admissible if it is considered that the applicant has not suffered 'significant disadvantage'; however, this is not a 'hard and fast' rule.
• A member state can be brought before the Court by the Committee of Ministers if that state refuses to enforce a judgment.
• The Committee of Ministers can ask the Court for an 'interpretation' of a judgement to help determine the best way for a member state to comply.

Amnesty International has expressed concern that these changes to the admissibility criteria will mean individuals may lose the ability to 'gain redress for human rights violations'.^[13]

Relationship to the ECJ

The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) is not related to the European Court of Human Rights. However, since all EU states are members of the Council of Europe and have signed the Convention on Human Rights, there are concerns about consistency in case law between the two courts. Therefore, the ECJ refers to the case-law of the Court of Human Rights and treats the Convention on Human Rights as though it was part of the EU's legal system. Even though its members have joined, the European Union itself has not, as it did not have competence to do so under previous treaties. However, EU institutions are bound under article 6 of the EU treaty of Nice to respect human rights under the Convention. Furthermore, since the Treaty of Lisbon has taken effect on 1 December 2009, the EU is expected to sign the Convention. This would make the Court of Justice bound by the judicial precedents of the Court of Human Rights and thus be subject to its human rights law, resolving this way the issue of conflicting case law.

Relationship to National Legal Orders

Most of the Contracting Parties to the European Convention on Human Rights have incorporated the Convention into their own national legal orders, either through constitutional provision, statute or judicial decision. Incorporation, coupled with the entry of force of Protocol No. 11, has dramatically enhanced the status of Convention rights, and the impact of the case law of European Court of Human Rights. National judges, elected officials, and administrators are now under increasing pressure to make Convention rights effective within national systems.^[14]

Notable decisions

The court has made a number of notable judgments in cases involving refugees, treatment of individuals, etc.^[15][16]

The December 1977 case of Ireland v United Kingdom (5310/71) is considered a "key decision" by the court.^[17] The Court ruled that the government of the United Kingdom was guilty of "inhuman and degrading treatment", of men interned without trial, following a case brought by the Republic of Ireland (Case No. 5310/71) involving the practice of the five techniques and the practice of beating prisoners constituted inhumane and degrading punishment.^[18][19]

Some other key cases cited include Soering v. the UK (June 1989) involving extradition to US to face the death penalty, Tyrer v. the UK (March 1978) regarding corporal punishment for juvenile offenders and Kokkinakis v. Greece (April 1993) which dealt with the conflict between the rights of different people.^{[20] [21]} In Loizidou v. Turkey the court's decision after 20 years resulted in the compensation amounts (of over $1 million) to a Cyrpriot refugee.^[22][23]

Architecture

The Richard Rogers Partnership designed European Court of Human Rights

The building, which houses the court chambers and Registry (administration and référendaires), was designed by the Richard Rogers Partnership and completed in 1995. The design is meant to reflect, amongst other things, the two distinct components of the Commission and Court (as it was then). Wide scale use of glass emphasises the 'openness' of the court to European citizens.

See also

• African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights – regional court established in 2006
• European Court of Human Rights cases
• Human rights in Europe
• Inter-American Court of Human Rights – regional court established in 1979
• Margin of appreciation – Legal doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights
• Relationship between the European Court of Justice and European Court of Human Rights
• Helen Keller and Alec Stone Sweet, A Europe of Rights: The Impact of the ECHR on National Legal Systems (Oxford University Press, 2008).[7]

Notes

External links

• Official website of the European Court of Human Rights
• Strasbourg Consortium - A Forum on Freedom of Religion in the European Court of Human Rights
• information for applicants
• Court judgements, decisions and case law website
• Rules of the Court (PDF)
• Case-processing flowchart (PDF)(before Protocol 14)
• Text of Protocol 14
• "Chechens taking Russia to court" - BBC News
• European Court of Human Rights condemns Russia in media case – IFEX

Council of Europe Institutions Secretary General · Committee of Ministers · Parliamentary Assembly · Congress · Court of Human Rights · Commissioner for Human Rights · Commission for the Efficiency of Justice Members Full Albania · Andorra · Armenia · Austria · Azerbaijan · Belgium · Bosnia and Herzegovina · Bulgaria · Croatia · Cyprus · Czech Republic · Denmark · Estonia · Finland · France · Georgia · Germany · Greece · Hungary · Iceland · Ireland · Italy · Latvia · Liechtenstein · Lithuania · Luxembourg · Macedonia1 · Malta · Moldova · Monaco · Montenegro · Netherlands · Norway · Poland · Portugal · Romania · Russia · San Marino · Serbia · Slovakia · Slovenia · Spain · Sweden · Switzerland · Turkey · Ukraine · United Kingdom Observer Canada · Israel · Japan · Mexico · United States · Vatican City Former Czechoslovakia (1991–1992) · Saar (assoc. 1950–1956) 1 Provisionally referred to by the Council of Europe as "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia"; see Macedonia naming dispute.