Strasbourg Observers
  • Guest Blogger

Tulkens on the barricades of freedom of expression and information

August 24, 2012

The Strasbourg Observers are delighted to post this tribute to Judge Tulkens by Professor Dirk Voorhoof, Ghent University. ‘Au moment où les vents sont contraires, nous pensons que notre Cour doit plus que jamais renforcer la liberté d’expression qui, loin de constituer une protection ou un privilège, est un des éléments clés de la démocratie’ […]

  • Guest Blogger

The art of dissenting. A few words on Judge Tulkens’ legacy

August 22, 2012

The Strasbourg Observers are delighted to post this tribute to Judge Tulkens by Professor Julie Ringelheim, Université catholique de Louvain. I warmly thank the team of Strasbourg Observers for this opportunity to highlight the remarkable contribution of Françoise Tulkens to the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) during the almost 15 years […]

  • Guest Blogger

L’affaire Gäfgen c. Allemagne comme prétexte à quelques mots d’hommage à Françoise Tulkens

August 20, 2012

The Strasbourg Observers are delighted to post this tribute to Judge Tulkens by Professor Ann Jacobs, University of Liège. La jurisprudence de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme est riche et foisonnante, personne ne le contestera. Elle est le fruit de conceptions diverses de la Justice et de la justice, d’expériences professionnelles et humaines […]

  • Guest Blogger

Françoise Tulkens on Human Rights’ Restrictions

August 16, 2012

The Strasbourg Observers are delighted to post this tribute to Judge Tulkens by Professor Samantha Besson, University of Fribourg. Françoise Tulkens is about to leave the European Court of Human Rights, and this is sad news. For the Court, of course, but also for the academic community. Throughout her career as a judge, Françoise Tulkens […]

  • Eva Brems

Thank you, Justice Tulkens: A comment on the dissent in N v UK

August 14, 2012

According to HUDOC, Judge Tulkens sat on the panel of 1843 ECtHR judgments, amongst which 217 Grand Chamber judgments. The same source lists as her oldest judgment the article 6 case of Van Pelt v. France on 23 May 2000. As HUDOC – however wonderful – has its imperfections, we cannot know  for certain whether […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

Announcing a Blog Tribute to Judge Tulkens

August 13, 2012

Next month, Judge Tulkens will be leaving the ECtHR after serving on it for fourteen years. She has been the Belgian judge since 1998, the year the new Court started working. As of 2011 she has been one of the Court’s two Vice-Presidents. We at the Strasbourg Observers are based in Belgium – at Ghent […]

  • Guest Blogger

Case Law, Strasbourg: Mouvement Raelien Suisse v Switzerland, Of Aliens and Flying Saucers

July 31, 2012

This guest post was written by Gabrielle Guillemin* and is a re-blog from Inforrm’s Blog (original post here).   Earlier this month, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights handed down judgment in Mouvement Raelien Suisse v Switzerland (Application no.16354/06). The case concerned the Swiss authorities’ refusal to allow a billboard campaign […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

Gender equality and religious freedom in politics; Dutch SGP case declared inadmissible

July 23, 2012

The ECtHR has brought a turbulent Dutch legal saga to a close. In the highly interesting Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij v. the Netherlands, the Court has declared the complaint by the Dutch political party ‘SGP’ inadmissible. The SGP is, in the words of the Court, “a confessional political party firmly rooted in historical Dutch Reformed Protestantism” […]

  • Guest Blogger

Herrmann v. Germany (GC): the importance of precedent and Strasbourg ‘micromanagement’

July 12, 2012

This guest post was written by Ingrid Leijten, Ph.D. researcher and teaching assistant at the Leiden University Faculty of Law, Department of Constitutional and Administrative Law. On 26 June 2012 the Grand Chamber delivered its judgment in the case of Herrmann v. Germany. It found a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 concerning […]

  • Lourdes Peroni

Violence Against Roma: Unmasking Racist Motives

July 03, 2012

One case I want to flag among the recent judgments of the Court is Koky and Others v. Slovakia. The case concerns an attack with possible racial overtones at a Roma settlement. In this post, I highlight a couple of interesting aspects of the Court’s reasoning under Article 3 but puzzle over the exclusion of […]

  • Eva Brems

‘Not a violation, because it works’ – A dangerous line of reasoning in Colon v. the Netherlands (adm.)

June 25, 2012

Can efficiency for the realization of a public good justify a rights-restrictive measure? Of course not. Human rights protect not only from governments or individuals with bad intentions, they also foreclose certain courses of action for the well-intended.  That torture works to elicit confessions, is an argument often made by  those who practice it, yet […]

  • Guest Blogger

Scoppola v. Italy (no. 3): The Grand Chamber faces the “constitutional justice vs. individual justice” dilemma (but it doesn’t tell)

June 20, 2012

This guest post was written by Cesare Pitea, Researcher in International Law (Faculty of Law) and Assistant Professor of Interational Law (Faculty of Political Science), University of Parma (Italy). 1.       Judging in a Heated Political Context In the Scoppola  v. Italy (no. 3) judgment ([GC], no. 126/05, 22 May 2012),  the third chapter of the […]

  • Guest Blogger

Proper judicial assessment of evictions is part of the proportionality test

June 14, 2012

This guest post was written by Wouter Vandenhole, Professor of Human Rights Law and holder of the UNICEF Chair in Children’s Rights at the University of Antwerp. Further information on Prof. Vandenhole can be found here. There is a growing interest with the human rights of older people (see e.g. Alexandra Timmer’s post here), also […]

  • Weichie

Fernández Martínez v. Spain : Towards a ‘Ministerial Exception’ for Europe?

May 24, 2012

In its recent judgment in Fernández Martínez v. Spain, the European Court of Human Rights appears to have abandoned its tried and tested formula of ad hoc balancing between the collective dimension of freedom of religion and individual human rights, established in Obst v. Germany, Schüth v. Germany and Siebenhaar v. Germany. In Fernández Martínez,the […]

  • Maris Burbergs

The ‘significant disadvantage’ in a ‘20 million case’

May 18, 2012

In a recent case the Court used the ‘significant disadvantage’ criterion to declare a complaint inadmissible. In Liga Portuguesa de Futebol Profissional v. Portugal the Court made a clear distinction between the human rights issue at stake and the case at large (which concerned 20 million euros).

  • Lourdes Peroni

Roma Evictions Stopped in Strasbourg: Yordanova e.a. v. Bulgaria

May 08, 2012

This post is co-authored by Lourdes Peroni and Alexandra Timmer The recent case of Yordanova and others v. Bulgaria concerns a pressing human rights issue: the mass eviction of Roma from their houses. The Court shows itself a strong defender of socially disadvantaged groups who risk eviction from land that they have lived on for […]

  • Guest Blogger

The Adventures of Tintin in the land of the law

May 02, 2012

This guest post was written by Jogchum Vrielink, postdoctoral researcher at the University of Leuven, Belgium.[1] In Belgium, a Congolese student and a minority organisation sought to obtain a ban on the comic book ‘Tintin in the Congo’. A Brussels court rejected their claims. Despite this outcome, the reasoning of the court jeopardises free speech. […]

  • Weichie

Strasbourg Observers Blow Out Two Candles

April 30, 2012

This month we are celebrating the Strasbourg Observers’ survival in the blogosphere – two years and counting! – and our continued eagerness to share our views on the Court’s case law with you, our readers. Much to our delight, we seem to be attracting more and more people. Over the past year, our blog has […]

  • Saïla Ouald Chaib

Ghent seminar on empirical face veil research (May 9)

April 26, 2012

The European Court of Human Rights has recently communicated the case of S.A.S. v. France, concerning a French woman challenging the French ban on face coverings. She alleges a violation of several Convention rights amongst which her freedom of religion, her right to private life and her right not to be discriminated against. This case […]

  • Laurens Lavrysen

No Access to Court: on Prison Leave, Social Reintegration and Legal Formalism

April 25, 2012

In the recent judgment of Boulois v. Luxembourg, the Grand Chamber denied a prisoner his right of access to court (Art. 6, § 1 ECHR) in a case concerning the refusal to grant him prison leave. The Grand Chamber’s reasoning is tainted by legal formalism and fails to do justice to the importance of social […]

1 39 40 41 42 43 49