Strasbourg Observers

View posts from: Uncategorized

  • Laurens Lavrysen

Failure to protect minor against stepfather filming her naked violates Article 8: Grand Chamber agrees with our third party intervention in Söderman v. Sweden

November 14, 2013

On 12 November, the Grand Chamber issued its judgment in the case of Söderman v. Sweden (formerly known as E.S. v. Sweden), finding that Sweden had failed to comply with its positive obligation to protect the applicant’s right to respect for private life (Article 8 ECHR). According to the Grand Chamber, neither a criminal remedy […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

Seminar Announcement: Stereotyping as a Human Rights Issue

November 11, 2013

The Human Rights Centre of Ghent University organizes a seminar on the topic of Stereotyping as a Human Rights Issue. The seminar will take place in Ghent on 4 December 2013. The purpose of this seminar is to explore the topic of stereotyping from a wide human rights perspective. We will address questions like: How […]

  • Guest Blogger

Newspaper Editor Criminally Liable for Senator’s Op-Ed, But Prison Sentence Violated Article 10: Belpietro v. Italy

October 07, 2013

This guest post was written by Ronan Ó Fathaigh* and Dirk Voorhoof** Nine years ago, in its landmark Cumpănă and Mazăre v. Romania judgment, a unanimous Grand Chamber laid down a rare absolute rule that prison sentences for defamation are never justified under Article 10 where the defamatory statements concern a matter of public interest. This […]

  • Laurens Lavrysen

Söderman v. Sweden: third party intervention of our Human Rights Centre

April 04, 2013

We were in Strasbourg yesterday to attend the Grand Chamber hearing in the case of Söderman v. Sweden. In this case, formerly known as E.S. v. Sweden, the Human Rights Centre of Ghent University  has submitted a third party intervention. We expect the Grand Chamber judgment to become the leading case on positive obligations under […]

  • Laurens Lavrysen

Procedural Justice in Human Rights Adjudication: The European Court of Human Rights

February 12, 2013

In the context of the project “Strengthening the European Court of Human Rights: More Accountability through Better Legal Reasoning”, Eva Brems and I have written an article in which we explore the relevance of the socio-psychological concept of ‘Procedural Justice’ for the European Court of Human Rights. I am proud to announce that this article […]

  • Weichie

Poll on the Best and Worst ECtHR Judgment of 2012: the ‘Winners’

February 04, 2013

Now that our poll on the best and worst ECtHR judgments of 2012 has been running for a couple of weeks, we considered it a good moment to formally announce the results of the voting, as of now. We curiously noted that visitors were much more likely to vote for best judgment (171 votes) than […]

  • Weichie

Poll: the best and the worst ECtHR judgments of 2012

January 15, 2013

To start off 2013, we are organising a poll to celebrate the best and recall the worst the ECtHR jurisprudence had to offer in 2012. We are inviting all readers to vote for what they consider to be the best and the worst ECtHR judgment of 2012, in the two polls below. We have nominated […]

  • Guest Blogger

MICHAUD V. FRANCE: A step forward into the Bosphorus doctrine, or a step backward into “subjective” foreseeability?

December 21, 2012

This guest post was written by Daria Sartori.* Two weeks ago, the European Court delivered a judgment in the case of Michaud v. France. Even though it is not final yet, this judgment is highly interesting because of its dual core,  giving better shape to the Bosphorus doctrine while reaching questionable conclusions on the nature […]

  • Lourdes Peroni

Redfearn v. the United Kingdom: Protection against Dismissals on Account of Political Belief or Affiliation

December 11, 2012

Last month, the Court decided a case that may end up in the Grand Chamber: Redfearn v. the United Kingdom. The case concerns the dismissal of an employee on account of his political affiliation with the British National Party (“the BNP”). At the relevant time, the BNP “only extended membership to white nationals” (paragraph 9). […]

  • Saïla Ouald Chaib

NEW BOOK: Diversity and European Human Rights: rewriting judgments of the ECHR

December 07, 2012

Our research team is delighted to announce the publication of our book “Diversity and European Human Rights: rewriting judgments of the ECHR” edited by prof. dr. Eva Brems and published by Cambridge University Press. This book is the fruit of the conference “Mainstreaming Diversity: Rewriting Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights” that we organized […]

  • Laurens Lavrysen

Is the Strasbourg Court tough on migration?

December 05, 2012

One of the reasons why critics continue to attack the Strasbourg Court is its alleged judicial activism in the field of migration.  The recent case of Shala v. Switzerland  illustrates that the criticism on the Court is at best exaggerated and at worst simply a straw man. In this case, the Court all too easily […]

  • Lourdes Peroni

Racial Discrimination in Strasbourg (Part II): Intersectionality and Context

October 17, 2012

In this post, I would like to discuss two recent cases dealing with the investigation of racial/sexual violence, as both of them offer promising legal reasoning on the topic. The first case, B.S. v. Spain, represents a key step in the recognition of intersectional discrimination. The other, Fedorchenko and Lozenko v. Ukraine, puts strong emphasis […]

  • Guest Blogger

Juge Tulkens, un hommage en forme d’acrostiche

September 11, 2012

The Strasbourg Observers are delighted to post this tribute to Judge Tulkens by Professors Emmanuelle Bribosia and Isabelle Rorive (Université libre de Bruxelles). Justice.- Qui mieux que Françoise Tulkens incarne la justice ?  Femme de principe, elle l’a encore été dans l’affaire Yoh-Ekale Mwanje c. Belgique (arrêt du 20 décembre 2011) qui concernait une ressortissante camerounaise atteinte […]

  • 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 […]

  • 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 […]

  • Guest Blogger

The Right To Protest Contained By Strasbourg: An Analysis of Austin v. UK & The Constitutional Pluralist Issues it Throws Up

April 17, 2012

This post is written by David Mead who is a Senior Lecturer at the UEA Law School and author of The New Law of Peaceful Protest: Rights and Regulation in the Human Rights Act Era published by Hart in 2010. More information about David can be found here The last few days have proved to be […]

  • Saïla Ouald Chaib

Francesco Sessa v. Italy: A Dilemma Majority Religion Members Will Probably Not Face

April 05, 2012

This post was co-authored by Saïla Ouald Chaib and Lourdes Peroni This week, in a 4-3 judgment, the Court ruled against a violation of the freedom of religion of Mr. Sessa, a lawyer and member of the Jewish faith, unable to attend a court hearing scheduled on Yom Kippur. The case is Francesco Sessa v. […]

  • Guest Blogger

Interception-at-sea: Illegal as currently practiced – Hirsi and Others v. Italy

March 01, 2012

This post is written by Marie-Bénédicte Dembour. She is Professor of Law and Anthropology at the University of Sussex. She is the author of Who Believes in Human Rights? Reflections on the European Convention and currently preparing a monograph provisionally entitled Migrant First, Human When? Testing Human Rights in the European and Inter-American Courts. Europe […]

  • Guest Blogger

Yes Prime Minister!

February 23, 2012

This post is written by Dirk Voorhoof* and Rónán Ó Fathaigh** 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.

  • Lourdes Peroni

U.S. Supreme Court and ECtHR: Conflicts between Religious Autonomy and Other Fundamental Rights

February 02, 2012

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. […]

1 2 3 4 5