Was passiert, wenn die Dogmatik des Amtshaftungsrechts mit den Maßstäben der EMRK in Konflikt gerät? Wie lässt sich eine Divergenz ausräumen? Mit diesen Fragen beschäftigt sich das Bundesverfassungsgericht in seinem erst jetzt veröffentlichten Beschluss vom 19. Mai 2023.
Die Aktionen der „Letzten Generation“ haben den gesellschaftlichen und juristischen Diskurs der letzten Monate geprägt. So engagiert die juristische Diskussion jedoch geführt wird, so sehr verharrt sie ganz überwiegend noch im nationalen Recht. Die zuständigen deutschen Strafrichter:innen werden sich jedoch auch dem Blick nach Straßburg nicht entziehen können – die Blockadeaktionen der „Letzten Generation“ stehen unter dem Schutz der in Artikel 11 Abs. 1 EMRK kodifizierten Versammlungs- und Vereinigungsfreiheit. Dieser Schutz steht einer strafrechtlichen Sanktionierung der Aktionen nicht grundsätzlich im Weg; eine Rückbesinnung auf die menschenrechtliche Dimension der Proteste kann und sollte aber ein Korrektiv für allzu ausgeartete Kriminalisierungs- bzw. Selbstjustizfantasien darstellen.
The ECtHR held a hearing in the case KlimaSeniorinnen v Switzerland. It is one of the first gender-based climate cases worldwide. The case offers novel perspectives on a range of issues. Crucially, it highlights new potential avenues for standing in human rights cases and pinpoints how age, health, gender, and climate change intersect.
The introduction of the Illegal Migration Bill to the UK Parliament appears to be the latest outburst of the Conservative government’s increasing hysteria with respect to the small boat crossings of the Channel in which Brexit-released fantasies of post-imperial sovereign power are acted out in the form of half-baked legislative proposals. The politically inconvenient fact that most of the 15% of asylum seekers who reach UK territory in this way are found to have legitimate asylum or protection claims seems to be a particular source of rage with a leaked Conservative Party email to party members under Suella Braverman’s name blaming “an activist blob of leftwing lawyers, civil servants and the Labour Party” for boat crossings, which at least suggests she knows her audience. This is “Build the Wall” for an island nation and, like Trump’s project, its primary value is as a fantasy object than a practical project.
The Bulgarian Supreme Court of Cassation (SCC) has recently rejected the possibility for legal gender reassignment of transgender people. The SCC followed the approach of the Constitutional Court in framing its reasoning alongside the lines of the traditional social values. In doing so, the interpretative decision arguably undermined its own goal of unifying the future case-law by avoiding the discussion on the right to equal treatment of transgender persons and their protection from discrimination on the ground of their sexuality.
The year 2022 will be remembered as one of ‘terrible violence and seismic change in Europe’, in the words of the High Level Reflection Group established by the Council of Europe to consider the organisation’s future. The Council of Europe has issued a public call for ideas, inviting input from international organisations, national human rights institutions, civil society organisations, academics, human rights defenders and others. The deadline for submissions is imminent – 20 February – and the need for radical thinking has never been greater.
Last week, the ECtHR ruled in Spasov, for the first time, that there was a 'denial of justice' and thus a violation of Article 6(1) ECHR due to a manifest error of law by a national court regarding the interpretation and application of EU law. A Romanian court had convicted Mr Spasov, the owner and captain of a Bulgarian-flagged vessel, of illegal fishing inside Romania’s exclusive economic zone. Spasov is an important principled judgment that further intertwines the EU and ECHR legal systems.
Entscheidungen über die Rechtmäßigkeit und Gültigkeit von Parlamentswahlen berühren den Kern rechtsstaatlicher Garantien im demokratischen Prozess. Umso erstaunlicher ist es, dass einige unserer europäischen Nachbarländer für die Wahlprüfung immer noch auf rein parlamentarische Verfahren vertrauen. Der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte hat das 2020 moniert, dabei aber eine kaum erklärliche Hintertür offengelassen.
On 18 October 2022, the European Court of Human Rights handed down its judgement in the case of Mørck Jensen v. Denmark, upholding the applicant’s conviction under Danish law of breaching the prohibition on entry into and stay in a conflict zone in order to participate in armed hostilities on the side of one party to an ongoing armed conflict. In its judgment, the Court consciously opted to take an objective or neutral stance towards the question of whether there may exist ‘right’ reasons to travel to a hot conflict zone in order to actively participate in armed activities.
Human rights courts can rarely avoid confrontation with backlashing states. This is particularly true for the two oldest and most prominent regional human rights courts, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). Yet, by close observation, we can witness that for both courts, backlash has triggered important institutional developments which will guide the work of human rights bodies in an increasingly polarized 21st century.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters