Der 70. Geburtstag des Europarats am heutigen Tage gibt Anlass zu Stolz und Freude. Doch gleichzeitig befindet sich der Europarat in einer tiefen politischen und finanziellen Krise. Zentrale Frage ist, inwieweit er bei der Durchsetzung der Pflichten der Mitgliedstaaten die Desintegration in Kauf nehmen muss. Die aktuelle Rhetorik sendet jedenfalls das falsche Signal.
On 18 March, following approval by President Putin, Russia’s controversial anti-fake news legislation entered into force. While Russia is not the only state to address the issues of hate speech or fake news with legislative means, its new legislation raises serious constitutional concerns, particularly due to its imprecise and overly broad scope of application.
The prospect of Russian withdrawal from the Council of Europe has been actively discussed during the past two months, including two excellent contributions on this blog. However, as often in cases of state backlash/pushback against international courts, the focus has mostly been on the external dimensions. States, though, are rarely ‘black boxes’, where different political actors have a uniform approach. Russia, despite its highly centralized appearance, is no exception. This post outlines the domestic state of play and contrasts the positions of interested parties.
Last week the Washington Post reported that top Russian officials are contemplating withdrawal from the Council of Europe. This latest development illustrates the growing tensions between Russia and the Council of Europe which could ultimately lead to the cessation of Russia's membership. Both Russia and the Council of Europe, however, face a dilemma when it comes to deciding what steps should be taken.
On 17 July 2018, the European Court on Human Rights reminded again that occupation of foreign lands and support of separatist regimes is a costly affair. This cost is not only calculated in terms of monetary repercussions but also in terms of reputational losses. On that day the chamber of the Court delivered a judgment in the case of Sandu and Others v Russia and Moldova. This judgment is a new one in the line of cases dealing with a breakaway region of Moldova – the self-proclaimed Republic of Transnistria.
Homophobe Rechtspraktiken in Russland haben eine lange Tradition, die von der russischen Regierung wie auch von der russisch-orthodoxen Kirche bewahrt werden. Das ohnehin schon zerrüttete Verhältnis Russlands zum EGMR wird durch das jüngste Urteil des Gerichtshofes zu einer Verurteilung wegen „Propaganda für Homosexualität“ weiter auf die Probe gestellt.
Can Ukraine's ban of Russian social media be legally justified? While the international community mostly condemns the ban, a closer look at the European Convention of Human Rights reveals that the matter is not so easy.
On 28 March 2017, the Grand Chamber of the EU Court of Justice (CJEU) decided in a preliminary ruling that the restrictive measures adopted by the Council against Russian undertakings, including oil company Rosneft, are valid. The judgment is of constitutional significance. It clarifies the scope of the CJEU’s jurisdiction with respect to acts adopted in the sphere of the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). In particular, it reveals that the EU system of judicial protection fully applies in relation to restrictive measures against natural and legal persons (so-called ‘targeted sanctions’).
On 19 December 2017 the Russian Constitutional Court (RCC) ruled that payment of just satisfaction in the Yukos case was contrary to the Russian Constitution. It is the first time the apex court of a Council of Europe member state concluded that it should not pay just satisfaction. This blog post provides the background of the case, sums up the reasoning of the RCC and assesses the implications of its judgment of 19 December 2017.
Russland und Großbritannien Seite and Seite gegen Europa? Das ist in fast jeder Hinsicht weit hergeholt – aber nicht unbedingt im Verhältnis zur Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention und zum Gerichtshof in Straßburg. Beide suchen nach Wegen, ihre Bindungen an die Vorgaben des Menschenrechts-Gerichtshofs zu lockern. Und beide nutzen als Anlass die unpopuläre Straßburger Rechtsprechung, dass auch Strafgefangenen nicht pauschal der Zugang zum Wahlrecht verwehrt werden darf.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters