Strasbourg Observers

View posts from: Cases

  • Guest Blogger

Condemning extraordinary rendition: El-Masri v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

January 10, 2013

This guest post was written by Mila Isakovska. Mila holds an LLM in International Public Law and Human Rights from the Riga Graduate School of Law and is currently working as Legal System Monitor in the OSCE Mission in Kosovo. The news of the Grand Chamber judgment in the extraordinary rendition case of El Masri […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

C.N. v. United Kingdom: the Court addresses domestic servitude

November 20, 2012

Amongst all the rightful concerns about the Strasbourg Court’s case-overload, I often find myself wondering about the cases that the Court isn’t getting. Some structurally occurring human rights violations aren’t receiving the attention of the Court – at least not in any amount that is proportionate to their scale. Domestic violence against women is one […]

  • Guest Blogger

New Judgment on Trade Union Freedom of Expression

November 07, 2012

This post is written by Dirk Voorhoof* The European Court of Human Rights delivered a new and remarkable judgment on trade union freedom of expression. In Szima v. Hungary the European Court concluded that a criminal conviction of a leader of a police trade union for having posted critical and offensive comments on the Union’s […]

  • 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 […]

  • Weichie

X. v. Turkey: Why a Ruling on the Basis of Discriminatory Effects Would Have Been Preferable

October 25, 2012

A few weeks ago, the European Court of Human Rights released its judgment in X. v. Turkey. The case concerned a homosexual detainee who was put in an individual cell and under a very restrictive detention regime, after he complained about intimidation and harassment by heterosexual detainees with whom he shared a collective cell. On […]

  • Alexandra Timmer

The Court on Racial Discrimination (Part I): M. and Others v. Italy and Bulgaria

October 09, 2012

It’s fair to say that the Court’s record on racial discrimination is hesitant. Only as late as 2004 did the Court for the first time find that a State was guilty of racial discrimination.[1] This was in the Chamber judgment of Nachova v Bulgaria, which was later partly rescinded by the Grand Chamber in 2005. […]

  • Maris Burbergs

Should the Court fix leaking roof problems?

October 03, 2012

Is the roof of the house in which you own a flat leaking? Is there a delay in repairs? Do you have to repaint the walls? Is there a delay of enforcement of decisions that ordered the repairs? These now seem to be valid questions for your potential human rights violation. In the case of […]

  • Strasbourg Observers

El Haski v. Belgium: Continued Debate on the (In)admissibility of Evidence Obtained through Ill-treatment

September 27, 2012

Earlier this week, the European Court of Human Rights released its judgment in El Haski v. Belgium, a case on the admissibility at a criminal trial of evidence potentially obtained through ill-treatment of third persons in a third State (Morocco). The ECtHR ruled that the Belgian authorities should have excluded the evidence from the trial. […]

  • 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

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 […]

  • 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 […]

1 18 19 20 21 22 26