European Court of Human Rights
Letter to UK Commission on a Bill of Human Rights This is a joint letter responding to the interim recommendations (and the parallel letter of 28 July) of the Commission on a Bill of Rights. This letter has been jointly authored by eight civil society organizations including EHRAC, the AIRE Centre, Amnesty International, INTERIGHTS, International Commission of Jurists, Human Rights Watch, JUSTICE, and the Open Society Justice Initiative.
From Judgment to Justice: Implementing International and Regional Human Rights Decisions
By David C. Baluarte and Christian M. De Vos. This report by the Open Society Justice Initiative reviews the implementation of judgments across the world's four human rights systems. Information provided by EHRAC appears in the Europe section.
Can the European Court’s Pilot Judgment Procedure Help Resolve Systemic Human Rights Violations? Burdov and the Failure to Implement Domestic Court Decisions in Russia
By Philip Leach, Helen Hardman and Svetlana Stephenson. This article was published in Human Rights Law Review (2010) 10(2): 346-359 and can be read (subject to access rights) here.
The ones that lost: Russian cases rejected at the European Court
By Grigory Dikov. This article was first published in Russian on www.polit.ru. The English version was produced by www.opendemocracy.net/russia and is posted here with the kind permission of Open Democracy and the author.
Opinion: on reform of the European Court of Human Rights
European Court of Human Rights: A Court in Crisis?
International Law Discussion Group Summary
Chatham House, June 2009
http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/files/14498_ildg300609.pdf
The Chechen Conflict: Analysing the Oversight of the European Court of Human Rights
This material was first published by Sweet & Maxwell in European Human Rights Law Review, Issue 6 [2008] and is reproduced by agreement with the Publishers.
For more than 10 years, the Russian Federation has been subject to the obligations of the European Convention on Human Rights, but the first decisions of the European Court of Human Rights relating to the second conflict in Chechnya (which began in 1999), were not published until 2005. Only now has a sufficient body of case law been produced by the Court to enable us to decipher its judicial perspective on the condition of human rights in that region. This article considers the European Court’s contribution to the international oversight of Chechnya, by examining its case law, and drawing conclusions as to the implications of its findings.
 |
The Chechen Conflict: Analysing the Oversight of the European Court of Human Rights |
Negating Pluralist Democracy: The European Court of Human Rights forgets the rights of the electors [2008] By Bill Bowring, Prava Cheloveka. Praktika Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka (Human Rights: Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights) Issue 6. This article is an edited version of an article by the same name that first appeared in KHRP Legal Review [2007]11 (see below).
This article reviews some recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in relation to Article 3 of Protocol 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), particularly Ždanoka v. Latvia and Yumak and Sadak v. Turkey. It argues that, in these judgments, the Court appears to be forgetting a fundamental principle underlying the right to pluralistic democracy, which is that the passive right to stand as a candidate in elections is not the right of the candidate, but of the electors.
Returning the Protection of Human Rights to Where They Belong, At Home [June 2008] By Costas Paraskeva, The International Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 12, No. 3, 415-448
This article seeks to explain and discuss the implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) at national level. It critically evaluates the Recommendations adopted by the Committee of Ministers in May 2004 in an attempt to improve the implementation of the ECHR in the domestic legal orders of the member states of the Council of Europe. In addition, it considers the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Finally, this article critically examines the novel ‘pilot judgment procedure’ developed by the ECtHR in order to tackle the phenomenon of ‘repetitive’ or ‘clone’ cases.
Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13642980802069666
Human Rights Protection Begins and Ends at Home: The ‘Pilot Judgment Procedure’ Developed by the European Court of Human Rights By Costas Paraskeva. First published in Human Rights Law Commentary, Volume 3, 2007: www.nottingham.ac.uk/law/hrlc/publications/hrlc.php
This article analyses the ‘pilot judgment procedure’ developed by the European Court of Human Rights in an attempt to tackle the phenomenon of ‘repetitive’ or ‘clone’ cases. These are applications (mainly coming from the new member states of Council of Europe) deriving from a structural or systemic situation in the respondent member state, which generates large numbers of, by definition, well-founded cases.
Human Rights Protection Begins and Ends at Home
Negating Pluralist Democracy: The European Court of Human Rights Forgets the Right of the Electors By Professor Bill Bowring, KHRP Legal Review (2007)11 67-96
This article reviews some recent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in relation to Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It argues that in its decisions in Zdanoka v Latvia and Yumak and Sadak v Turkey the Court appears to be forgetting a fundamental principle underlying the right to pluralist democracy, which is that the ‘passive’ right to stand as a candidate in elections is not the right of the candidate, but of the electors.
The Effectiveness of the Committee of Ministers in Supervising the Enforcement of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
By Philip Leach, Public Law, Issue 3, 2006
Non-compliance with Court judgments can both undermine the credibility of the European Court system and the Council of Europe, and entail serious consequences for successful applicants and those in comparable situations. This article, therefore, examines the pressing issue of the effectiveness of the Committee of Ministers in discharging its enforcement role.
Positive Obligations from Strasbourg - Where do the Boundaries Lie?
By Philip Leach. First published in the INTERIGHTS' Bulletin, Volume 15, No 3: Positive Obligations of States and the Protection of Human Rights, www.interights.org
This article discusses positive obligations imposed on states by the Court. Recent developments involving these impositions are examined and the burdens caused by positive obligations are considered.
Recent Developments in European Convention Law Philip Leach. Legal Action, February 2006
Philip Leach continues his series on cases at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) that have particular relevance to the UK. This article covers the period from June to November 2005.
Recent Developments in European Convention Law
Every week - 300 new cases Utta Hartlib, http://www.inopressa.ru/, 29 December 2005
An article outlining the abundance of applicants from the Russian Federation taking their cases to the European Court of Human Rights. The author stresses the number of cases from Chechen applicants, and tells of the long wait involved in bringing a case to Strasbourg.
Russia sets record with number of lawsuits filed at Strasbourg Court
http://english.pravda.ru, 5 November 2005
Pravda interviews Luzius Wildhaber, the chairman of the European Court
for Human Rights, who gives his opinion on the Court's alleged biased
attitude towards Russia. He also talks about Strasbourg Court procedure
and the appointment of judges.
The British Military in Iraq - applicability of the espace juridique doctrine Philip Leach. Public Law [2005] P.L. 448
Philip Leach discusses the Divisional Court's judgment concerning the jurisdiction of British forces in Iraq and whether or not the European Court of Human Rights has an obligation to investigate certain deaths.
Beyond the Bug River: New approaches to redress by the ECHR
Philip Leach. European Human Rights Law Review ([2005] EHRLR 148)
"This article seeks to analyse the Court's innovative approaches to reparation and to discern relevant principles. It argues that the shackles of a merely declaratory approach to redress have now, rightly, been thrown off for good."
Human Rights 'Hotspots' and the European Court
Philip Leach. New Law Journal, 6 February 2004
Philip Leach considers how European human rights protection can be strengthened to deal with gross violations.
