Articles for tag: Centrum för Rättvisa v. Sweden, EGMR, surveillance, Sweden

Big Brother’s Little, More Dangerous Brother

On 25 May 2021, the European Court of Human Rights issued judgments in two connected cases: Big Brother Watch v. UK and Centrum för Rättvisa v. Sweden. Both cases involved the review of bulk interception of communications, described by its critics as “mass surveillance”. The Swedish example has attracted less criticism from the ECtHR than the UK, and can be construed as a model law. However, the Swedish legislation is highly opaque and the ECtHR's scrutiny has fallen short.

1. Juni 2021

, , ,

The Admissibility Hurdle

The entry into force of a new Protocol in August 2021 indicates that the ECtHR will implement even more stringent admissibility criteria which provides the institution with more tools to reject legitimate applications and to hide the political motivation behind such decisions. The European Court of Human Rights has long faced burning criticism for declaring applications inadmissible when faced with prima facie flagrant human rights abuses by autocratic regimes, such as Turkey, putting in question the credibility of the Court which is expected to be a center of legal excellence.

27. Mai 2021

, , ,

A Ghost that Haunts European Democracies

In Turkey, Spain and Poland, lèse-majesté laws are weaponised against opposition: The conviction and imprisonment of Marxist rapper Pablo Hasél sparked mass protests across Spain, and the 20-year-old Wiktoria K. who shouted “f*** Duda” during last year’s demonstrations and received a guilty verdict on grounds of “insulting the President” in March 2021. The very existence of lèse-majesté laws poses a threat to the right to dissent. It is a vital democratic duty to cast such laws into the dustbin of history.

18. Mai 2021

, , , ,

Menschenrechtliche Grenzen für Pushbacks – und der weitergehende Schutz nach EU-Sekundärrecht

Das europäische Asylrecht plagen mehrere Strukturprobleme. Es setzt auf hochkomplizierte Verfahren, die in langen Verordnungen niedergelegt sind, die an den europäischen Außengrenzen rechtspraktisch vielfach nicht funktionieren. Außerdem gibt es bis zum heutigen Tag keine einzige Vorlage eines griechischen Gerichts, die sich mit der Situation auf den griechischen Inseln oder gar mit der Grenzüberwachung in der Ägäis beschäftigte.

17. Mai 2021

, ,

The ECtHR Steps into the Ring

For the last two years, the fight for safeguarding the principle of the rule of law in Poland has been dominated by the ECJ’s case law. During this, the Strasbourg Court has mostly been sitting in the bleachers. Yet, with its Xero Flor judgment of 7 May, it strapped on its gloves and stepped into the ring. It concluded that the Polish Constitutional Tribunal, in its current composition, cannot be seen as a tribunal established by law. The decision will undoubtedly have major political and legal consequences.

10. Mai 2021

, , , , ,

What Should and What Will Happen After Xero Flor

On 7 May 2021, the European Court of Human Rights issued a judgment in a case concerning irregularities in the personal composition of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal. The ECtHR found a violation of “the right to a tribunal established by law” due to fact that the decision on the discontinuation of the proceedings concerning a constitutional complaint filed by a Polish company was issued by the Constitutional Tribunal with the participation of a person who was unlawfully elected to the position of judge. The said judgment is the first ruling of an international body finding that the irregularities in the functioning of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal violate international law.

9. Mai 2021

, , ,

How Many Times Can the ECtHR Turn its Head

In the ruling Ahmet Hüsrev Altan v. Turkey of 13 April, the European Court of Human Rights did not find an ulterior motive in the prolonged pre-trial detention of a journalist in Turkey. The Court also refused to find “pattern and tendency” in the treatment of civil society and independent journalism in Turkey. This approach is not limited to Article 18 case law: The Court’s entire jurisprudence on Turkey lacks systematic analysis.

21. April 2021

, , ,

Is Compulsory Vaccination Compulsory?

On Thursday 8 April 2021, the European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment in Vavřička and others v. the Czech Republic. The Grand Chamber ruled strongly (16:1) in favour of the Czech government, granting the state a wide margin of appreciation in the assessment of the need for compulsory vaccination of children. In light of the COVID-related challenges, it is important that the Court took a clear stance regarding the importance of vaccination. At the same time, however, it is regrettable that the Court did not offer a stronger and more coherent reasoning justifying its value-driven decision.

12. April 2021

, ,

Money Talks

One of the judges of the Constitutional Court of Albania was dismissed after the country introduced radical judicial vetting measures. She challenged her dismissal before the ECtHR, claiming her rights to a fair trial and respect for private and family life were violated. In its decision in Xhoxhaj v Albania published on 2 February 2021, the ECtHR rejected her application and gave clear priority to the need for cleaning up a corrupt judiciary. It denied protection under the ECHR to those who seek to abuse human rights for protecting a status quo of corruption.

5. März 2021

, , , ,

Call Me by Mum’s Name

In a recent decision, the Italian Constitutional Court took up the question of the choice of surname for newborns. In the absence of legislative reforms, it has tried to adapt the Italian legal framework, which still adheres to traditional naming practices, to constitutional and international standards of equality. This step shows the Court’s intention to counter the Parliament’s inertia on the issue.

23. Februar 2021

, , , ,