<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Strasbourg Observers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://strasbourgobservers.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com</link>
	<description>Blog commenting on developments in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 13:11:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='strasbourgobservers.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://strasbourgobservers.com/osd.xml" title="Strasbourg Observers" />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://strasbourgobservers.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>Yes Prime Minister!</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/23/yes-prime-minister/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/23/yes-prime-minister/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 13:10:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Guest Blogger</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Freedom of Expression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Reputation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tuşalp v. Turkey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1415</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This post is written by Rónán Ó Fathaigh* and Dirk Voorhoof** In the case of Tuşalp v. Turkey, the European Court was asked to consider whether two defamation actions taken by the Prime Minister of Turkey against a journalist for protection of his personality rights were compatible with Article 10 of the European Convention. The [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1415&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/23/yes-prime-minister/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/8d1dc660943ad1417ef2c9aa74070c66?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnsmet</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Grand Chamber Seeks to Clarify Balancing of Article 10 and Article 8</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/21/grand-chamber-seeks-to-clarify-balancing-of-article-10-and-article-8/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/21/grand-chamber-seeks-to-clarify-balancing-of-article-10-and-article-8/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2012 12:45:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Guest Blogger</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Axel Springer v. Germany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conflicting Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedom of Expression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Private Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Von Hannover (no. 2) v. Germany]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1406</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today’s guest post was written by Rónán Ó Fathaigh, one of our colleagues at the Human Rights Centre. More information on Rónán can be found on the website of the Center for Journalism Studies of Ghent University, here. The Grand Chamber of the European Court delivered two judgments recently concerning the appropriate balancing exercise where [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1406&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/21/grand-chamber-seeks-to-clarify-balancing-of-article-10-and-article-8/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/8d1dc660943ad1417ef2c9aa74070c66?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnsmet</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Anti-Gay Hate Speech: Vejdeland and Others v. Sweden</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/14/anti-gay-hate-speech-vejdeland-and-others-v-sweden/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/14/anti-gay-hate-speech-vejdeland-and-others-v-sweden/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:15:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Timmer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conflicting Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedom of Expression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGBT Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stereotypes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vejdeland a.o. v. Sweden]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1395</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Court has handed down a fascinating judgment on the freedom of expression. Vejdeland and others v. Sweden is the first time that the Court applies the principles relating to hate speech in the context of sexual orientation. A unanimous Court has ruled that Sweden did not violate the right to freedom of expression: the [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1395&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/14/anti-gay-hate-speech-vejdeland-and-others-v-sweden/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/73f698d01514880403df289e5de0ab61?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">alexandra126</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Othman (Abu Qatada) v. the United Kingdom: Questioning Gäfgen?</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/08/othman-abu-qatada-v-the-united-kingdom-questioning-gafgen/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/08/othman-abu-qatada-v-the-united-kingdom-questioning-gafgen/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:10:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stijn Smet</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gäfgen v. Germany]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Othman (Abu Qatada) v. the United Kingdom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prohibition of Inhuman Treatment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1383</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The European Court of Human Rights recently delivered its judgment in Othman (Abu Qatada) v. the United Kingdom, a case concerning the deportation of a terrorism suspect from the UK to Jordan. The applicant, Mr. Othman, had arrived in the United Kingdom in 1993, having fled Jordan. He requested asylum, alleging that he had been [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1383&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/08/othman-abu-qatada-v-the-united-kingdom-questioning-gafgen/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cc245115c8047e461d1ac238a9372c4b?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnesmet</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. Supreme Court and ECtHR: Conflicts between Religious Autonomy and Other Fundamental Rights</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/02/u-s-supreme-court-and-ecthr-conflicts-between-religious-autonomy-and-other-fundamental-rights/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/02/u-s-supreme-court-and-ecthr-conflicts-between-religious-autonomy-and-other-fundamental-rights/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 14:21:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Lourdes Peroni</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1374</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cases involving conflicts between religious autonomy and other rights such as non-discrimination and respect for private life seem to be gaining more and more prominence in different parts of the world. One recent example is the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission et al. [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1374&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/02/02/u-s-supreme-court-and-ecthr-conflicts-between-religious-autonomy-and-other-fundamental-rights/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/afee3dc533d8dee072748b1a7cf69f97?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">lourdesperoni</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Less stringent measures and migration detention: overruling Saadi v. UK?</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/01/25/less-stringent-measures-and-migration-detention-overruling-saadi-v-uk/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/01/25/less-stringent-measures-and-migration-detention-overruling-saadi-v-uk/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 13:09:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Laurens Lavrysen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asylum Seekers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Children&#039;s Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Migration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Liberty and Security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1368</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The recent cases of Yoh-Ekale Mwanje v. Belgium and Popov v. France illustrate how a ‘less stringent measures test’ is entering the Court’s reasoning under Art. 5 § 1 ECHR in migration detention cases. The Court appears to be slowly moving away from its deferential approach in Saadi v. The United Kingdom. This might result [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1368&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/01/25/less-stringent-measures-and-migration-detention-overruling-saadi-v-uk/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/4efb1522b085082c2cb8a130d2696219?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">laulav</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Competing Interests in Paternity Cases: Iyilik v. Turkey</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/01/16/competing-interests-in-paternity-cases-iyilik-v-turkey/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/01/16/competing-interests-in-paternity-cases-iyilik-v-turkey/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 15:56:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stijn Smet</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conflicting Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iyilik v. Turkey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Private Life]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1353</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Facts The recent judgment of Iyilik v. Turkey concerns competing interests of an applicant and his (legal) daughter in a paternity case. The wife of the applicant, Mr. Iyilik, had given birth to a daughter in 1966. Mr. Iyilik denied being the biological father and a year later the couple divorced. Mr. Iyilik then brought [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1353&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2012/01/16/competing-interests-in-paternity-cases-iyilik-v-turkey/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cc245115c8047e461d1ac238a9372c4b?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnesmet</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Strasbourg Court condemns Belgian internment policy</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/22/strasbourg-court-condemns-belgian-internment-policy/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/22/strasbourg-court-condemns-belgian-internment-policy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2011 12:25:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Laurens Lavrysen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Disability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Liberty and Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Life]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1343</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On 6 December 2011, the European Court of Human Rights found the Belgian internment policy to be in breach of the ECHR. The case of De Donder and De Clippel v. Belgium concerned Tom De Clippel, a mentally ill person who had committed suicide while interned in an ordinary prison. Under Belgian law, internment (“internering” / [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1343&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/22/strasbourg-court-condemns-belgian-internment-policy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/4efb1522b085082c2cb8a130d2696219?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">laulav</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Strasbourg Court and the Arab Spring</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/12/the-strasbourg-court-and-the-arab-spring/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/12/the-strasbourg-court-and-the-arab-spring/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Dec 2011 12:55:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Saïla Ouald Chaib</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Al Hanchi v. Bosnia and Herzegovina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asylum Seekers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Non-refoulement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prohibition of Inhuman Treatment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1334</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[International politics are never far away in cases dealing with the extradition of individuals to third countries. In the case of Al Hanchi v. Bosnia and Herzegovina the European Court of Human Rights was confronted with an extradition of a so-called foreign mujahedin to Tunisia. Until now, the Court had a clear stance. The deportation [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1334&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/12/the-strasbourg-court-and-the-arab-spring/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/565cd974c34743e37e7678a0241152d1?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">sailaoc</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>French Roma policy violates European Social Charter</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/06/french-roma-policy-violates-european-social-charter/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/06/french-roma-policy-violates-european-social-charter/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2011 13:46:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Laurens Lavrysen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Migration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minority Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prohibition of Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Roma Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1322</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a decision of 28 June (COHRE v. France, no. 63/2010), which was only recently made public, the European Committee of Social Rights has found the French zero tolerance policy towards East European Roma living in illegal camps to be in violation of the European Social Charter. The case, which was lodged by the NGO [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1322&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/06/french-roma-policy-violates-european-social-charter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/4efb1522b085082c2cb8a130d2696219?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">laulav</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Turkish Law Criminalising “Denigration of Turkish Nation” Overbroad and Vague</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/02/turkish-law-criminalising-denigration-of-turkish-nation-overbroad-and-vague/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/02/turkish-law-criminalising-denigration-of-turkish-nation-overbroad-and-vague/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2011 12:49:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Guest Blogger</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1305</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This guest post is co-authored by Rónán Ó Fathaigh and Chris Wiersma, two colleagues from the Human Rights Centre. More information on Rónán and Chris can be found on the website of the Center for Journalism Studies of Ghent University, here  In its recent Akçam v. Turkey judgment, the Second Section of the European Court [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1305&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/12/02/turkish-law-criminalising-denigration-of-turkish-nation-overbroad-and-vague/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/8d1dc660943ad1417ef2c9aa74070c66?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnsmet</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Toward an Anti-Stereotyping Approach for the ECtHR</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/30/toward-an-anti-stereotyping-approach-for-the-ecthr/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/30/toward-an-anti-stereotyping-approach-for-the-ecthr/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov 2011 15:10:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Timmer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Our Recent Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stereotypes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1301</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As part of our joint research project I have written an article on gender stereotyping and the ways this could be addressed by the European Court of Human Rights in its case law. Now I&#8217;m not sure whether flagging my own research is correct blog-etiquette, but I will take this opportunity to let you know [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1301&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/30/toward-an-anti-stereotyping-approach-for-the-ecthr/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/73f698d01514880403df289e5de0ab61?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">alexandra126</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Deference or Substantive Resolution? The ECJ&#8217;s Brüstle Judgment on the Use of Human Embryos for Scientific Research</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/28/deference-or-substantive-resolution-the-ecjs-brustle-judgment-on-the-use-of-human-embryos-for-scientific-research/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/28/deference-or-substantive-resolution-the-ecjs-brustle-judgment-on-the-use-of-human-embryos-for-scientific-research/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:23:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Guest Blogger</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Moral Dilemmas]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1291</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This post was co-authored by Wannes Van Hoof* and Stijn Smet. Recently, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) was asked to deliver a preliminary ruling on the use of human embryos for scientific research. The case concerned an application by Greenpeace, seeking annulment from the German courts of a patent held by Mr. Brüstle. The [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1291&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/28/deference-or-substantive-resolution-the-ecjs-brustle-judgment-on-the-use-of-human-embryos-for-scientific-research/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/8d1dc660943ad1417ef2c9aa74070c66?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnsmet</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court condemns forced sterilization of Roma woman</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/17/court-condemns-forced-sterilization-of-roma-woman/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/17/court-condemns-forced-sterilization-of-roma-woman/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:09:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Lourdes Peroni</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Prohibition of Inhuman Treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Respect for Family Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[V.C. v. Slovakia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women's Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1280</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This post is co-authored by Lourdes Peroni and Alexandra Timmer The Court has recently ruled in V.C. v. Slovakia, a case brought by a Roma woman who complained that she was sterilized without her informed consent. The judgment is no doubt a landmark decision with crucial implications for women belonging to minority ethnic groups. In [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1280&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/17/court-condemns-forced-sterilization-of-roma-woman/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/afee3dc533d8dee072748b1a7cf69f97?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">lourdesperoni</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>S.H. and Others v Austria: margin of appreciation and IVF</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/09/s-h-and-others-v-austria-margin-of-appreciation-and-ivf/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/09/s-h-and-others-v-austria-margin-of-appreciation-and-ivf/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 10:07:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Timmer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Grand Chamber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Margin of Appreciation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Private Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Respect for Family Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[S.H. and others v. Austria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women's Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1268</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Austria, it is forbidden to use donated sperm or ova for in vitro fertilization (‘IVF’). Ovum donation is under all circumstances prohibited; sperm donation is only possible when the sperm is directly placed in the womb of a woman (in vivo artificial insemination). Two Austrian couples complained about this regulation; the first couple needs [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1268&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/11/09/s-h-and-others-v-austria-margin-of-appreciation-and-ivf/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/73f698d01514880403df289e5de0ab61?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">alexandra126</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trafficking in Persons and the European Court of Human Rights</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/26/trafficking-in-persons-and-the-european-court-of-human-rights/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/26/trafficking-in-persons-and-the-european-court-of-human-rights/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 10:08:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Guest Blogger</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Human Trafficking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women's Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1261</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This guest post was written by Dr. Roberta Avellino. Dr. Avellino studied Law at the University of Malta where she graduated as Doctor of Laws. She has moreover obtained a Master of Laws in International Law following research on trafficking in persons, security governance and State responsibility. She has recently published an article on the [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1261&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/26/trafficking-in-persons-and-the-european-court-of-human-rights/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/8d1dc660943ad1417ef2c9aa74070c66?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnsmet</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ambit and Scope of Article 8 in Citizenship Cases</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/23/ambit-and-scope-of-article-8-in-citizenship-cases/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/23/ambit-and-scope-of-article-8-in-citizenship-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Oct 2011 16:32:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maris Burbergs</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Admissibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Genovese v. Malta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prohibition of Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Private Life]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1253</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a recent judgment in the case of Genovese v. Malta the Court gave very few words when determining the scope and ambit of Article 8. The Court managed to exclude a right, find no violation and determine the scope in the same sentence, and, in contrary to previous citizenship cases, did not give one word [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1253&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/23/ambit-and-scope-of-article-8-in-citizenship-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/22872003f8453b2c87caeb4945b73e0d?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">burbergs</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bah v UK: on immigration, discrimination and worrisome reasoning</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/12/bah-v-uk-on-immigration-discrimination-and-worrisome-reasoning/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/12/bah-v-uk-on-immigration-discrimination-and-worrisome-reasoning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:02:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Timmer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bah v. UK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prohibition of Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Respect for Family Life]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1244</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This post was co-authored by Lourdes Peroni and Alexandra Timmer The Court recently ruled on the case of Ms. Bah, a Sierra Leonean woman with indefinite leave to remain in the UK, who asserted that she was discriminated against in the allocation of social housing. The Court’s reasoning in Bah v. UK gives ample food [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1244&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/12/bah-v-uk-on-immigration-discrimination-and-worrisome-reasoning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/73f698d01514880403df289e5de0ab61?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">alexandra126</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Karttunen v. Finland: Child Pornography and Freedom of Expression</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/10/child-pornography-and-freedom-of-expression/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/10/child-pornography-and-freedom-of-expression/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:50:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Guest Blogger</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Freedom of Expression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Karttunen v. Finland]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1236</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today’s guest post was written by Rónán Ó Fathaigh, one of our colleagues at the Human Rights Centre. More information on Rónán can be found on the website of the Center for Journalism Studies of Ghent University, here. In a recent admissibility decision which has received scant attention, the European Court considered for the first [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1236&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/10/child-pornography-and-freedom-of-expression/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>16</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/8d1dc660943ad1417ef2c9aa74070c66?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnsmet</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The right to bury one’s relatives</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/06/the-right-to-bury-one%e2%80%99s-relatives/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/06/the-right-to-bury-one%e2%80%99s-relatives/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2011 12:40:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maris Burbergs</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Girard v. France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Private Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Respect for Family Life]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1230</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a recent judgement in the case of Girard v. France  (in French) the Court recognized a new right under Article 8 – the right to bury one’s relatives. This case involved three aspects of dealing with an individual’s remains under the Convention: returning the body to relatives, organizing and attending a funeral, and treatment [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1230&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/06/the-right-to-bury-one%e2%80%99s-relatives/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/22872003f8453b2c87caeb4945b73e0d?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">burbergs</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Stummer v. Austria: gradually moving towards a right to an old-age pension for working prisoners?</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/03/stummer-v-austria-gradually-moving-towards-a-right-to-an-old-age-pension-for-working-prisoners/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/03/stummer-v-austria-gradually-moving-towards-a-right-to-an-old-age-pension-for-working-prisoners/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2011 14:09:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Guest Blogger</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Prohibition of Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stummer v. Austria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1216</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Ingrid Leijten. Ingrid Leijten works as a Ph.D. fellow and teaching assistant at the Leiden University Faculty of Law, Department of Constitutional and Administrative Law. Her research interest lies in the development of the ECHR and the practice of the ECtHR in relation to the Member States’ policymaking. Stummer v. Austria deals with the [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1216&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/10/03/stummer-v-austria-gradually-moving-towards-a-right-to-an-old-age-pension-for-working-prisoners/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/8d1dc660943ad1417ef2c9aa74070c66?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnsmet</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Poll on Palomo Sánchez</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/29/a-poll-on-palomo-sanchez-2/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/29/a-poll-on-palomo-sanchez-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:31:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stijn Smet</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Freedom of Expression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Reputation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1172</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We are pleased to be organising our first poll to ask our readers about their opinion! The poll concerns the recent judgment of Palomo Sánchez v. Spain in which the Grand Chamber of the Court ruled that the Spanish courts had not failed their positive obligation to protect the freedom of expression of four employees [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1172&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/29/a-poll-on-palomo-sanchez-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cc245115c8047e461d1ac238a9372c4b?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnesmet</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://strasbourgobservers.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/1019_0012.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">1019_001</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>When is Family Life Family Life? A Look at Deportation Cases</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/27/when-is-family-life-family-life-a-look-at-deportation-cases/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/27/when-is-family-life-family-life-a-look-at-deportation-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 12:06:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Lourdes Peroni</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[A.A. v. the United Kingdom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Right to Respect for Family Life]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In A.A. v. the United Kingdom, a recent case involving the deportation of a young Nigerian man, the Court faced, once again, the question whether relationships between adult children and parents/siblings amount to family life in deportation cases. The Court’s Fourth Section did not give a clear answer to this question. The 24-year-old applicant resided [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1193&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/27/when-is-family-life-family-life-a-look-at-deportation-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/afee3dc533d8dee072748b1a7cf69f97?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">lourdesperoni</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Blood Donations and the Permanent Exclusion of “Men Who Have Sex with Men”</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/20/blood-donations-and-the-permanent-exclusion-of-%e2%80%9cmen-who-have-sex-with-men%e2%80%9d/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/20/blood-donations-and-the-permanent-exclusion-of-%e2%80%9cmen-who-have-sex-with-men%e2%80%9d/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:35:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stijn Smet</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[LGBT Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prohibition of Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stereotypes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1149</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Belgium, as in many other European countries, homosexual men are not allowed to donate blood. To be more precise, not homosexual men are permanently excluded from donating blood, but “men who have sex with men”. “What’s in a name?”, you might ask. That is what I intend to find out in this post. Reasonable [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1149&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/20/blood-donations-and-the-permanent-exclusion-of-%e2%80%9cmen-who-have-sex-with-men%e2%80%9d/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cc245115c8047e461d1ac238a9372c4b?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnesmet</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Grand Chamber Judgment on Trade Union Freedom of Expression</title>
		<link>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/14/grand-chamber-judgment-on-trade-union-freedom-of-expression/</link>
		<comments>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/14/grand-chamber-judgment-on-trade-union-freedom-of-expression/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:46:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Guest Blogger</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Freedom of Expression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Palomo Sànchez v. Spain]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strasbourgobservers.com/?p=1143</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This post is written by Rónán Ó Fathaigh* and Dirk Voorhoof** The Grand Chamber of the European Court issued a landmark judgment this week on trade union freedom of expression, concluding that the dismissal of trade union members for engaging in offensive and insulting expression in a union newsletter was not a violation of the [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=strasbourgobservers.com&amp;blog=13103691&amp;post=1143&amp;subd=strasbourgobservers&amp;ref=&amp;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://strasbourgobservers.com/2011/09/14/grand-chamber-judgment-on-trade-union-freedom-of-expression/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/8d1dc660943ad1417ef2c9aa74070c66?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">stijnsmet</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
