ECHR

I. Inleiding: toenemende kritiek op het EHRM
II. De impact van het EVRM op de rechtspraak van vier hoogste nationale rechtscolleges
A. De Nederlandse Hoge Raad tussen monisme en het toetsingsverbod
B. Het VK Supreme Court en de duplicatie van EVRM-rechten via de Human Rights Act 1998
C. Onrechtstreekste toetsing aan het EVRM door het Belgische Grondwettelijk Hof
D. Het Duitse Federaal Grondwettelijk Hof gespleten tussen dualisme en openheid
III. De impact van de rechtspraak van het EHRM op de rechtspraak van vier hoogste nationale rechtscolleges
A. De Nederlandse Hoge Raad en de incorporatietheorie
B. VK Supreme Court en de spiegelbenadering
C. De volgzaamheid van het Belgische Grondwettelijk Hof
D. De zeldzame verwijzingen door het Duitse Federaal Grondwettelijk Hof
E. Een vergelijkend overzicht
IV. Grenzen aan het volgen van de rechtspraak van het EHRM
A. Het overstijgen van de ‘minimumstandaard’ en het invullen van de appreciatiemarge
B. Gebrek aan heldere en consistente rechtspraak van het EHRM
C. Weigering om rechtspraak van het EHRM te volgen
1. Het EHRM heeft de nationale juridische context misverstaan of de impact van de rechtspraak verkeerd ingeschat
2. Onverenigbaar met de grondwettelijke kern of met een fundamenteel materieel of procedureel aspect van het nationaal recht
V. Conclusie

The case of Lautsi v. Italy, better known as the “Crucifix Case,” is a particularly significant case. Its significance is not only political and legal, but also religious. Never before in the history of the European Court of Human Rights and the Council of Europe has a case raised so much public attention and debate. The debate regarding the legitimacy of the symbol of Christ’s presence in Italian schools is emblematic of the cultural crisis in Western Europe regarding religion. Twenty-one State parties to the European Convention on Human Rights, in an unprecedented move, joined Italy to reassert the legitimacy of the public display of Christian symbols in European society. The Court finally recognized, in substance, that in countries of Christian tradition, Christianity enjoys a special social legitimacy that distinguishes it from other philosophical and religious belief systems. In other words, because Italy is a country of Christian tradition, Christian symbols may legitimately enjoy greater visibility in Italian society than other religious or ideological symbols.

The continues changing and evolution of the European Union has determinate the changing of the judicial system, as well. The accession of the EU to the European Convention on Human Rights will complete the EU system of protecting fundamental rights, by ensuring a better protection of civil, economic, political and social rights through the European Court of Human Rights. Furthermore, the EU's accession will strengthen the protection of human rights in Europe, positioning the EU legal system as an independent external auditor.
Even though the EU is founded on the respect for fundamental rights, the observance of which is ensured by the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Convention on Human Rights and its judicial mechanism do not formally apply by EU acts. On the other hand, all member states of the EU, as parties on the European Convention on Human Rights, have the obligation to respect it, even when they are applying or implementing EU law. By this accession, European Union stresses out once again its intention to provide a higher level of protection of the rights by all means possible, including also the European Court of Human Rights.
This paper has attempted to give an overview of some of the most problematic and contentious issues of the accession of EU to the ECHR.

In 1973, Louise O’Keeffe was, along with many other children at her school, repeatedly sexually abused by her school principal. While her abuser’s culpability was clear, the culpability of the Irish State for creating the conditions in which sexual abuse of children could take place unchecked became the subject of a protracted legal battle that culminated in the ruling of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in O’Keeffe v Ireland in January 2014. This article examines the background to this litigation and explores in detail the reasoning given by the Court for finding that Ireland had failed in its obligation to implement effective child protection measures in primary schools, as well as its obligation to provide an effective remedy to Louise O’Keeffe. The implications of the ruling for child protection across Council of Europe member states are also considered.

The article studies freedom of thought, conscience and religion, as one
of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The author analyses Article 9 of European convention on protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, Article 18 of International covenant on Civil and political rights, decisions on UN Human Rights Committee and European court on human rights and expresses her opinion on restrictions on freedom of religion.

The wide range and constant development of human rights cause them to clash with one another much more often. Hence, the need for answering a serious question arises; how do we resolve conflicts among fundamental rights? Growing importance of human rights makes it crucial to find a solution.

This article examines the 'full jurisdiction' requirement under Article 6 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and its implementation within European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law. It first analyses the theoretical foundations for 'full jurisdiction' which implies, in principle, a substitutive review of the merits of administrative decisions. It then focuses on the ECtHR case law, highlighting its ambivalence and inconsistencies: while the Court generally requires a substitutive review in criminal cases and in cases involving complex technical assessments, it tends to accept a less exacting standard of review in civil cases, especially when administrative discretionary choices or policy determinations are at issue. This article suggests that the ambivalence and inconsistencies within ECtHR case law can be explained in terms of the principle of separation of powers, which still underpins most legal systems of signatory states to the ECHR.

The Italian lawmakers have recently extended the anti-
Mafia non conviction based confiscation to the persons suspected of belonging to a criminal association aimed to corruption or to the commission of various crimes against public administration. This provision, although apparently in line with the tendency increasingly widespread on a supranational level to use instruments of a broadly preventive character to fight serious crimes, raises some issues, especially in terms of compliance with human rights protection. Indeed, although these measures focus
on property and not on individuals, in many cases they
significantly affect the life and well being of the people involved.
After analysing the European Court of Human Right (ECtHR) case law on administrative measures having criminal nature and on Anti-Mafia non conviction based confiscation, the
article investigates the legitimacy of the extension of this specific form of non-conviction based confiscation to the crimes against public administration.

Le sujet de ce travail est la relation entre l’art. 17 (interdiction de l’abus de droit) et la liberté d’expression dans la jurisprudence de la Cour. L’ancienne Commission européenne des droits de l’homme et la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme ont interprété cette interdiction de l’abus de droit article au fil des années en l’utilisant notamment comme outil pour dénier la protection de l’art. 10 CEDH garantissant la liberté d’expression ou pour faciliter sa restriction au regard de l’art. 10 §2. Le but de ce travail sera d’analyser cette jurisprudence et d’en cerner les enjeux.
Après une première partie consacrée à l’importance de la liberté d’expression, aux restrictions « classiques » à celle-ci basées sur l’art. 10 §2 et au cas particulier de l’art. 17, suivront trois parties portant sur les différents cas de figure dans lesquels l’art. 17 trouve à s’appliquer pour restreindre la liberté d’expression. La première sera consacrée au traitement des affaires concernant la démocratie mise en danger par des partis anti-démocratiques ou par le discours d’incitation à la violence, la deuxième à celui des affaires concernant du discours de haine et la dernière au traitement du discours négationniste.
Tout au long de ces développements, la question sera celle de savoir dans quelle mesure l’art. 17 est un outil approprié pour restreindre comparativement à l’art. 10 §2 CEDH.

This article analyses the scope of the human rights of refugees in the ECHR looking at the latest trends in the jurisprudence developed by the Court and which are relevant to the protection of refugees. In doing so, it concentrates on the determination of those rights by the Court, leaving aside issues of access to those rights by refugees.  Its focus is primarily on the latest interpretation by the Court of Article 3 (prohibition against ill-treatment), Article 6 (right to a fair and public hearing), Article 8 (protection of family and private life), Article 13 (effective remedy), Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination), and Article 1 of Protocol 7 (procedural safeguards against expulsion).  This analysis forms the core of the article with a first section on the protection of refugees against expulsion and a second section on the protection of the basic rights of refugees who are present in the territory of a Contracting State. Finally, a brief conclusion summarizes the limits and opportunities of the ECHR for the protection of refugees in Europe.

La CEDH construit progressivement un droit conventionnel au suicide assisté qui découle d’une vision du suicide comme expression de l’autonomie individuelle. Ainsi, ce « droit » ne trouve pas sa cause dans la souffrance, mais dans la liberté, rendant incohérent le fait de le réserver aux personnes grabataires. La seule responsabilité de l’Etat serait d’éviter les abus en veillant à la qualité de la volonté de mort. La Cour transcrit ainsi l’individualisme et le matérialiste contemporains, révolutionnant un fondement de la Convention: la dignité humaine ne serait plus inhérente, mais relative et réflexive, absorbée dans la liberté individuelle.

"Friendly settlement procedure allows termination of the applications, which are received by supranational human rights monitoring mechanisms without a final decision on alleged violations. In the first chapter, the typology of friendly settlements and the differences from similar procedures will be examined. After analyzing the friendly settlement procedures under various human rights conventions beside ECHR in the second chapter, the friendly settlement procedure and the unilateral declarations under ECHR will be explained in the third chapter. In the final chapter, suggestions will be made through evaluating the opinions regarding friendly settlement and unilateral declarations proposed in the doctrine.
Keywords: Human Rights, European Convention on Human Rights, Friendly Settlement Procedure, Unilateral Declarations."

Dostane çözüm yolu, ulusalüstü insan hakları denetim organlarına yapılan başvuruların ihlal olup olmadığına ilişkin nihai bir karar verilmeksizin sona ermesini sağlamaktadır. Çalışmanın ilk bölümünde dostane çözüm yolunun türleri ve benzer kurumlardan farkları incelenecek, ikinci bölümünde ise AİHS dışındaki ulusalüstü insan hakları belgeleri çerçevesinde dostane çözüm yolunun uygulanması ele alınacaktır. Üçüncü bölümde AİHS’nin yürürlüğe girmesinden bugüne kadar dostane çözüm yolunun uygulanması anlatılarak dostane çözüm girişimlerinin başarısız olması halinde başvurulan tek taraflı bildirim sonucu davaların kayıttan düşürülmesi usulü incelenecektir. Son bölümde ise dostane çözüm ve tek taraflı bildirimlere yönelik doktrinde belirtilen görüşler değerlendirilmek suretiyle önerilerde bulunulacaktır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: İnsan Hakları, Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi, Dostane Çözüm Yolu, Tek Taraflı Bildirimler.

The European Court of Human Rights has through a voluminous case law, significantly developed its jurisprudence regarding the circumstances in which overcrowding in detention facilities constitutes a breach of Article 3 of the ECHR. It has done so by highlighting the central place that the concept of human dignity occupies under Article 3, so that conditions that interfere with the inherent dignity and worth of a person constitute degrading treatment for purposes of Article 3. In considering applicants’ complaints in respect of overcrowding and humiliating detention conditions and in urging contracting states to comply with Article 3 requirements in this area, the Court employs a number of tools at its disposal: the pilot judgment procedure, extensive references to CPT reports, Council of Europe resolutions and other relevant international standards on the range of issues raised by detention on a large scale in Europe. This article seeks to analyse the issue of overcrowding in prisons in member states of the Council of Europe and discuss the relevant Court’s case law addressing member states’ failures and obligations under Article 3.

W książce przedstawiono zasadę proporcjonalności jako instrument umożliwiający kontrolę politycznie umocowanych działań władzy, które w nomenklaturze prawnej określa się mianem „władzy dyskrecjonalnej” lub „swobodnego uznania”. Oznaczało to konieczność zbadania doktrynalnych podstaw oraz instytucjonalnego rozwoju sądowej kontroli działań organów władzy, zwłaszcza tych, które pozostawały w sferze swobodnego uznania. Przedmiotem analizy były treści doktrynalne oraz prawo we Francji, Niemczech, Austrii i Anglii oraz w Polsce od XIX w., do czasów obecnych. Pozwoliło to, obok prezentacji samego zagadnienia kontroli kompetencji dyskrecjonalnych i zasady proporcjonalności w podstawowych europejskich kulturach prawnych, ukazać również rozwój nowoczesnej teorii politycznej i szeroko pojmowanego prawa publicznego ze wskazaniem na charakterystyczne dla tych procesów prawidłowości.
****************************************************************************************
The principle of proportionality is presented as a means which makes the judicial review of discretionary powers possible. For this reason, the book starts with an analysis of the very concept of discretionary powers in itself, its philosophical origins and legal consequences, as well as the development of the judicial review of action by the state on its different levels (first administrative, then legislative) in various European countries. The legal systems of the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Austria are examined from the 19th century to the present day, and the Polish legal system since 1918. This is the context in which the emergence of the principle of proportionality in German law is described, as well as its development and subsequent reception throughout the whole of Europe. Particular attention is devoted to the principle of proportionality in EU law and within the system of the European Convention of Human Rights. An investigation is carried out of the crucial role of case law under the ECHR for the pan-European reception of proportionality. This is followed by an examination of the way in which the German and French legal methods for the judicial review of discretionary powers have shaped the identity of the proportionality principle within EU law.The adoption of the principle of proportionality at the turn of the 20th and 21st century is described in detail in relation to the legal systems of France, Austria, the United Kingdom and Poland. Particular attention is devoted to the fact that the principle was first adopted on the level of constitutional law and only later in administrative law, with a certain exception for the United Kingdom?, due to the absence of a regular constitutional review. It is also pointed out that the judicial means of reviewing discretionary powers (including the principle of proportionality) are very powerful instruments for the strengthening of one political centre against another. This aspect is analysed in the context of administrative – parliamentary relations in 19th-century Europe and in the relations between national legislatures and EU transnational administration in the late 20th and early 21st century.

The 2020 pandemic caused by Sars-Cov-2 (hereinafter, the coronavirus pandemic), has triggered an array of legal responses across Council of Europe States. Many measures taken by states to slow the spread of the virus by ‘flattening the curve’ and enforce social distancing are similar across states. That stated, one key fault-line opening up is on the question of whether to derogate from the ECHR under Article 15.  The purpose of this  article is to demonstrate why Article 15 ECHR should be used to accommodate what has become known as ‘lockdown’ powers necessary to confront the coronavirus pandemic. This is the closest we shall get to an ‘ideal state of emergency’—the very situation it was designed for.  In contrast, far from protecting human rights, failure to use Article 15 ECHR risks normalising exceptional powers and permanently recalibrating human rights protections downwards.

Pour la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, comme dans la plupart des droits nationaux, l’avortement relève d’une logique de tolérance. Cette tolérance est fondée sur la pétition de principe qu’il serait juridiquement et scientifiquement impossible, mais en fait surtout non souhaitable, de savoir si l’enfant à naître est une personne. Cette tolérance est accordée dans l’ordre interne via la technique de la marge d’appréciation nationale, mais elle n’a pas d’effet quant à la substance du droit à la vie dans l’ordre proprement conventionnel. La Cour a toujours refusé d’exclure explicitement l’enfant à naître du champ d’application de la Convention et de juger que cet enfant à naître n’est pas une personne. Tant qu’il en sera ainsi, il sera impossible de prétendre à l’existence d’un droit à l’avortement au titre de la Convention, et tout avortement pratiqué devrait être justifié par des droits et intérêts garantis par la Convention et proportionnés aux « autres droits et libertés concurrents, y compris ceux de l'enfant à naître ».

Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights requires that the state not only abstains from inflicting death, but also protects life. Nonetheless, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights seems to be progressively outlining a right to assisted suicide, which would fall in the scope of the right to private life. In this order, the court modifies the ground of dignity: it is no more inherent to human nature, but linked to each individual's perception of dignity. Finally, this case law raises questions relating to the role of the court.

On the 18th of December 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered the historic Opinion 2/13, where it ruled that the draft agreement on the accession of the European Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is not compatible with Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union or with Protocol (No 8) relating to Article 6(2) TEU.In terms of practical effects, the Court’s long list of objections to the draft agreement as expressed in Opinion 2/13, blocked, at least temporarily, the road towards the accession of the EU to the ECHR. Furthermore, in symbolic terms, Opinion 2/13 reflected the Court’s fundamental disagreement with the Commission, the Council, the European Parliament, and the 24 Member States that submitted their observations in the context of the Opinion request, all concluding that “the draft agreement is compatible with the Treaties”. Finally, in terms of internal organization and function, Opinion 2/13 exposed the division between the Court and the Advocate General Kokott, who had concluded in her View that under certain conditions, the draft agreement is compatible with EU law. It is, therefore, evident that there are many aspects of Opinion 2/13 that require thorough analysis and interpretation. The core of this Thesis is an attempt to answer the following questions:

1. Did the Court fully and adequately justify its negative Opinion to the question of the European Commission on the following issue: “is the draft agreement providing for the accession of the European Union to the European Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, signed in Rome on 4 November 1950 (‘the ECHR’) compatible with the Treaties?”?

2. How is the protection of human rights in Europe affected by the Court’s rejection of the accession of the EU to the ECHR and what is the way forward?

Dopo avere dato conto della evoluzione subita dal principio di precauzione a livello internazionale, europeo e nazionale, il lavoro si sofferma sul tema dell'allentamento del principio di legalità-prevedibilità dell'azione amministrativa che si può verificare quando siano adottate misure cautelative per gestire il rischio nelle situazioni di incertezza. Inoltre, viene esaminata criticamente la tendenza espansiva del principio di precauzione che, nella legislazione nazionale, dovrebbe oramai vincolare non solo la pubblica amministrazione, ma pure i soggetti privati.

Диссертация на соискание ученой степени канд. юрид. наук.

Посвящена исследованию онтологии и прикладного механизма взаимодействия Европейского Суда по правам человека и национальных судебных юрисдикций при осуществлении правосудия по гражданским делам.
Предпринята попытка осмыслить правовую природу деятельности ЕСПЧ и юридическую силу его постановлений в контексте гармонизации цивилистического процесса. С привлечением широкого круга литературных и правоприменительных источников, в том числе на иностранных языках, материалов судебной практики как в России, так и за рубежом, исследуются вопросы о роли и месте ЕКПЧ в системе источников гражданского процессуального права; о понятии и сущности доктрины свободы усмотрения (margin of appreciation doctrine) и ее эволюции.

By a judgment rendered on 23 February 2016, the European Court of Human  Rights found that Italy was in breach of its obligations under the European Convention for its role in the abduction of Abu Omar, who was transferred to Egypt where he was secretly detained and tortured. He was the victim of an extraordinary rendition within a program set by the United States after 11 September 2001 with the complicity of several States. Following the abduction of Abu Omar, various criminal proceedings were opened in Italy against twenty-six Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) members and some Italian secret service agents involved in the abduction. The CIA agents were sentenced to imprisonment, but the Italian Government did not request their extradition. Because of the privilege of "State secret" invoked by the Italian Government, no Italian secret agent was sentenced.
        The judgment of the European Court raises several interesting questions. The present paper focuses on two issues: first, the basis of Italy's responsibility because of its cooperation in the extraordinary rendition of Abu Omar; second, the compatibility of the resort to "State secrets" with the protection of human rights under the European Convention. The paper maintains that responsibility has not to be linked with the complicity in a wrongful act of another State, but in the breach of a positive obligation of protection under the Convention.

"This article addresses the role of strategic litigation of the right to legal capacity of people with disabilities. It places legal capacity within an international human rights law framework and sets out how it is particularly resonant in the context of disability where its withdrawal leads to arbitrary removal of rights such as the right to property, healthcare decision-making, working and voting. The article examines art.12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), a treaty which, at the time of writing, has been signed by all 27 Member States of the European Union and ratified by 18. In addition, the EU has acceded to the Convention, the CRPD being the first UN human rights treaty that has provided this opportunity.The author provides a review of European jurisprudence in the area of legal capacity and suggests that litigation can play a valuable role in highlighting the wrongs in guardianship systems, and opening
up areas for advocacy and law reform."

In recent years, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled on a number of cases dealing with the issue of abortion, providing a sufficient corpus of jurisprudence which may be analysed in a consistent manner. A number of analysts, on both sides of the abortion debate, are not satisfied with this case-law. This article aims not to discuss each ruling of the Court case by case, but to try to find, in an objective and systematic manner, the coherency of the jurisprudence of the Court, and in doing so, to present a reasoned legal account of abortion under the Convention.

Birinci bölümde öncelikle çevre hakkı teriminin anlaşılması amacıyla bu hakkın tanımı, hukuki niteliği ve kapsamı hakkında açıklamalar yapılacak, daha sonra bu hakkın uluslararası ve ulusal düzlemdeki önemli kaynaklarına değinilecektir. Son olarak ise bu hakkın önemli ilkelerinden bahsedilecektir. İkinci bölümde ilk olarak AİHM’nin çevresel davalara koruma sağlarken özellikle dayandığı yorum yöntemleri ve doktrinlere değinilecektir. Üçüncü bölümde kabul edilebilirlik koşulları bakımından çevresel davalarda özellik gösteren birtakım hususlara yer verilecektir. Devamı bölümde ise çevresel davalarda AİHM’nin koruma kapsamını sınırlandıran bir etmen olarak ulusal takdir marjı doktrinine değinilecektir. Beşinci bölüm, AİHM’nin çevresel davalardaki yaklaşımını, çevre hakkına koruma sağlayan Sözleşme veya Ek Protokollerinde düzenlenmiş her bir hak bağlamında ele alacaktır. Son bölümde ise çevresel davalarda söz konusu olan usuli güvenceler, spesifik olarak çevresel davalara ait güvenceler ve genel olarak var olan güvenceler olarak ikili bir ayrımla incelenecektir.

Il volume analizza l'ambito di applicazione e il rilievo, per il diritto amministrativo sostanziale e processuale, dell'art. 6 CEDU in tema di "equo processo" . Si dà conto di come tale disposizione sia direttamente applicabile alla gran parte dei procedimenti amministrativi sanzionatori o comunque incisivi delle posizioni soggettive individuali, nonché, in via correttiva ed ex post, alla successiva fase giurisdizionale di impugnazione dei relativi provvedimenti. Si delineano poi i principali e conseguenti effetti di adattamento e di necessaria trasformazione dell'ordinamento nazionale che da tale quadro derivano (in particolare, sul piano dell'incremento delle garanzia procedimentali, e del più penetrante sindacato sulle valutazioni tecniche complesse e sulla discrezionalità amministrativa)

Beden muayenesi ve vücuttan örnek alınması, gelişen teknolojinin etkisi ile birlikte ceza muhakemesinde uygulanmaya başlanmış bir delil elde etme yöntemidir. Karma niteliği haiz bir tedbir olan beden muayenesi ve vücuttan örnek alınması maddi gerçeğin ortaya çıkarılması bakımından oldukça önemlidir. Zira suça ilişkin bırakılan izler suçun aydınlatılmasında önemli rol oynamaktadır. Tedbir, temel hak ve özgürlükler üzerinde ağır müdahale niteliğinde olduğundan kanunda açık biçimde düzenlenmesi ve koşullarının belirli olması gereklidir. Bu anlamda, 5271 sy. Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu ve Yönetmeliklerde yer alan düzenlemeler, bu gereklilikleri sağlar nitelikte değildir. Çalışmamızda eksik hususları tespit etmeye çalışarak, konuya ilişkin AİHM kararlarını bu çerçevede değerlendireceğiz.

The article is devoted to the issues of attorney’s secrecy that underlie advocacy. Since 1984, the European Court of Human Rights, in a number of important decisions, has referred to the obligation of the state to provide effective guarantees for the protection of legal confidentiality
in criminal proceedings. This article analyzes the role and significance of the legal positions expressed in the decisions of the ECHR in the context of ensuring lawyer’s secrets in the Republic of Armenia. The relevance of the study on the protection of attorney’s secrecy in the activities of an attorney is currently due to the fact that, despite the existence of normative regulation of the institution of attorney’s confidentiality, we have to admit that it is not effective enough in practice and is often violated.

Dopo avere dato conto di come il tema delle sanzioni amministrative sia stato sottoposto, negli ultimi anni, a una profonda revisione critica, soprattutto in ragione dell'influenza crescente esercitata dalla giurisprudenza della Corte europea dei diritti dell'uomo, il lavoro si sofferma sul principio di tassatività-determinatezza delle sanzioni amministrative quale riconosciuto a livello costituzionale interno e mostra che interessanti sviluppi derivano oggi dall'art. 7 della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell'uomo (CEDU), nell'interpretazione offertane dalla giurisprudenza di Strasburgo