Articles for tag: Art. 3 EMRK, EGMR, Kollektivausweisung, Non-Refoulement-Gebot

Hot Returns bleiben in der Praxis EMRK-widrig

In seinem Urteil N.D. und N.T. von letzter Woche hat die Große Kammer des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte eine Verletzung des in Art. 4 4. Zusatzprotokoll der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention verankerten Kollektivausweisungsverbots durch Spanien abgelehnt. Daraus den Schluss zu ziehen, die Praxis der sog. hot returns (unmittelbare Abschiebungen ohne individuelle Prüfung direkt an der Grenze) sei vom EGMR gutgeheißen worden, ist angesichts der Presseerklärung des EGMR dazu verständlich aber falsch. Die Praxis der hot returns war und bleibt rechtswidrig.

21. Februar 2020

, , ,

Kolevi: Bulgaria’s 10-Year Cat-and-Mouse Game with the Council of Europe and the Venice Commission

A cat-and-mouse game perfectly describes Bulgaria’s stubborn refusal to comply with Kolevi v Bulgaria, which requires a reform of Bulgaria’s Prosecutor’s Office, and it has been going on for a decade. The latest trick pulled out of the bag is quite original – Bulgaria’s government essentially asked Bulgaria’s Constitutional Court to clarify if some of the concerns raised by the Venice Commission were reasonable, and this court deemed the question admissible.

12. Februar 2020

, , ,

Only a Court Established by Law Can Be an Independent Court

In A.K. and others, the European Court of Justice established a detailed method for assessing the independence (or lack thereof) of courts. The judicial independence test laid down by the ECJ, however, may not be entirely fit for the purpose of assessing the lawfulness of courts and judges which are established and appointed on the basis of flawed procedures by bodies arguably violating basic judicial independence requirements as established in EU law. The ECJ appears to limit the required verification under EU law to the issue of independence only. Instead, the reviewing body should, first, check whether the challenged court (judge) is “established by law” and only then, if necessary, follow up on the examination of its independence. Today the Polish Supreme Court has the opportunity to step up and give full effect to that criterion.

23. Januar 2020

, ,

Why the Turkish Constitutional Court’s Wikipedia Decision is No Reason to Celebrate

The Turkish Constitutional Court (TCC) recently lifted the ban on Wikipedia and a surge of, in my view, unwarranted optimism has now sprung out of nowhere both among international and Turkish circles following the case closely. I fail to share this optimism. By all means, the lifting of the ban on Wikipedia is something to be happy about. But the timing and content of the TCC’s decision, when especially read through the political context in which it was handed down, do not give much reason to celebrate.

20. Januar 2020

, ,

The Turkish Judiciary’s Violations of Human Rights Guarantees

On 3 December 2019, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled in the case of Parmak & Bakir v Turkey that the Turkish judiciary’s interpretation of the offence of membership of an armed terrorist organization violated Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights, being the absolute right to no punishment without law. Although the case deals with incidents from 2002, it shows how Turkey’s post-coup terrorism trials violate Turkey’s obligations under the ECHR.

9. Januar 2020

, ,

Shying Away from Strasbourg

Last week, the Italian Constitutional Court published its reasoning on a judgment regarding the so-called ergastolo ostativo (life sentence without parole). The challenged provision excludes persons convicted of serious crimes – primarily mafia-type – from a series of benefits (for example, permits and conditional release) in the event that they do not want to collaborate with the authorities. Italy’s Constitutional Court now held that this provision is not in line with the constitution but missed a chance to give full effect to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.

17. Dezember 2019

, ,

Time for Strasbourg to Open its Doors to Turkey’s Purged Public Servants

A report by the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project (TLSP) provides fresh evidence that the Commission formed in 2017 to examine the mass dismissals of public servants and liquidation of media outlets and other organisations functions arbitrarily and without transparency. Together with concerns about judicial review by administrative courts and the Constitutional Court, the report casts serious doubt on whether victims of abuses committed under emergency laws have access to an effective domestic remedy – a finding with implications for the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) as it considers the long queue of Turkish applications before it.

4. Dezember 2019

,

Menschenrechte im Mittelmeer

Was bedeutet es Rechte zu haben? Diese Frage bekommt drängende Relevanz, wenn es um die Reichweite menschenrechtlicher Verantwortung geht, so im Fall S.S. und andere gegen Italien, der vor dem Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte anhängig ist. Der EGMR hat zu entscheiden, inwiefern die Unterstützung der libyschen Küstenwache und Koordination von Rettungsaktionen eine Verantwortung Italiens nach der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention auslöst.

27. November 2019

, ,

Der Schutz kultureller Rechte am Beispiel der »Kurdenpolitik« der Türkei

Dass das Völkerrecht den jüngsten Angriff der Türkei auf die nördlichen Provinzen Syriens nicht deckt, hat nicht nur der wissenschaftliche Dienst des Bundestages bereits ausführlich dargelegt. Darüber hinaus stellt sich die Frage, ob hier der Beginn eines (kulturellen) Völkermordes stattfindet. Das Völkerstrafrecht kennt den Tatbestand des kulturellen Völkermordes nicht und der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte übt sich in Zurückhaltung, wenn kollektive Rechte betroffen sind. So entsteht eine gravierende Rechtslücke im Menschenrechtsschutz, die zumindest auf europäischer Ebene dringend geschlossen werden sollte.

23. Oktober 2019

, , ,