Strasbourg Observers

View posts from: Right to Private Life

  • Guest Blogger

P and S v. Poland: adolescence, vulnerability, and reproductive autonomy

November 05, 2012

The Strasbourg Observers are delighted to publish this guest post by Johanna Westeson, Regional Director for Europe, Center for Reproductive Rights. The Center for Reproductive Rights represented the applicants in P and S v. Poland before the ECtHR; see the Center’s press release here. This week, the European Court of Human Rights issued its decision […]

  • Guest Blogger

Bio-ethics under Human Rights Scrutiny: Toward a Right to Pre-implantation Genetic Testing under the ECHR?

September 20, 2012

This guest post was written by Adriana Di Stefano. Adriana is a tenured researcher and lecturer in international law at the Faculty of Law of the University of Catania. Her areas of expertise include international humanitarian law, human rights law and EU Law. On August 28th, 2012 the Second Section of the European Court 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 […]

  • 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 […]

  • Guest Blogger

Criminal conviction of professor for refusal to give access to research files did not affect his Convention rights: Gillberg v. Sweden

April 04, 2012

This post on freedom of expression, academic research, privacy protection and access to official documents is written by Dirk Voorhoof* and Rónán Ó Fathaigh** The Grand Chamber of the European Court has, more firmly than its Chamber judgment of 2010, confirmed that a Swedish professor could not rely on his right of privacy under Article […]

  • Maris Burbergs

Remembering the private and family lives of mentally disabled persons

March 29, 2012

In the case of Stanev v. Bulgaria the Grand Chamber gives hope for future developments in the Court’s approach towards the protection of private and family lives of mentally disabled people (Lycette Nelson from the Mental Disability Advocacy Center has also blogged about this case, read it here). Even though the majority did not find […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

Stereotypes of Roma: Aksu v. Turkey in the Grand Chamber

March 20, 2012

 The Grand Chamber has handed down its much-awaited judgment in Aksu v. Turkey. This case concerns the use of derogatory stereotypical images of Roma in government-sponsored publications. The Grand Chamber holds with 16 votes to 1 that article 8 (right to private life) has not been violated. I have mixed feelings about the Court’s reasoning. […]

  • Guest Blogger

Grand Chamber Seeks to Clarify Balancing of Article 10 and Article 8

February 21, 2012

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 […]

  • Weichie

Competing Interests in Paternity Cases: Iyilik v. Turkey

January 16, 2012

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 […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

S.H. and Others v Austria: margin of appreciation and IVF

November 09, 2011

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 […]

  • Maris Burbergs

Ambit and Scope of Article 8 in Citizenship Cases

October 23, 2011

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 […]

  • Maris Burbergs

The right to bury one’s relatives

October 06, 2011

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 […]

  • Guest Blogger

R.R. v. Poland: health rights under Art. 8 ECHR

June 02, 2011

By Laurens Lavrysen* As Alexandra correctly noted in her post, R.R. v. Poland is a very interesting judgment. The focus of this post will lie on the general health rights implications of this judgment, which exceed the specific context of reproductive health. In the case of Tysiąc v. Poland (ECtHR 20 March 2007) the Court […]

  • Maris Burbergs

How significant is the ‘significant disadvantage” of the new admissibility criterion (Part II)?

May 09, 2011

It has been claimed[1] and it is also my understanding that human rights protect important aspects of a human life. The views on what are the important aspects may vary. The drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights put in their views; inspired by the rights in the Declaration, the European Convention was composed, […]

  • Weichie

Mgn Limited v. the United Kingdom: Naomi Campbell v. the Tabloid Press

March 14, 2011

Mgn Limited v. the United Kingdom concerned several articles published in 2001 in the tabloid Mirror (now Daily Mirror), revealing that supermodel Naomi Campbell was attending Narcotics Anonymous (NA) meetings in an attempt to treat her drug addiction. The articles were accompanied by several photographs, including one in which Ms. Campbell was seen standing in […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

Gypsy Way of Life “By Birth” or “By Choice”

February 22, 2011

This post is co-authored by Lourdes Peroni and Alexandra Timmer In an inadmissibility decision that might have gone unnoticed by many, the Court has recently ruled in an interesting case, Horie v UK. The case involves a “New Age Traveler” who complained of an impediment on her ability to pursue a nomadic way of life. […]

  • Weichie

Haas v. Switzerland and Assisted Suicide

January 27, 2011

The applicant in Haas v. Switzerland was a 57 years old male who suffered from a bipolar disorder since nearly 20 years. Wishing to commit suicide, Mr. Haas attempted to obtain a lethal substance (sodium pentobarbital) that was only available on medical prescription. To that end, he contacted several psychiatrists, but was not able to […]

  • Maris Burbergs

The right to choose the circumstances of becoming a parent

January 13, 2011

In the end of last year the Court delivered a judgment in the case of Ternovszky v. Hungary. In this judgment the Court created a new right – the right to choose the circumstances of becoming a parent. I will not focus on the discussion about the safety of the mother and the child that […]

  • Weichie

A., B. and C. v. Ireland: Abortion and the Margin of Appreciation

December 17, 2010

A., B. and C. v. Ireland concerned three Irish applicants who, in their first trimester of pregnancy, had travelled to England to have an abortion because they believed they would not be allowed to have one in Ireland. The Irish Constitution, unlike the European Convention on Human Rights, explicitly extends the right to life to […]

  • Guest Blogger

Gillberg v. Sweden: conviction of professor for refusal to grant access to sensitive research data not in breach of ECHR

November 22, 2010

This guest post on freedom of expression, academic research, privacy protection and access to official documents has been written by Professor Dirk Voorhoof. Professor Voorhoof is affiliated to both Ghent University (Belgium) and Copenhagen University (Denmark). He is also a Member of the Flemish Regulator for the Media. Further information on Professor Voorhoof can be […]

1 2 3 4 5