Internationales Menschenrechtsrecht und supranationaler Rechtsschutz durch internationale Gerichte, Verträge und Überwachungsmechanismen. Im Gegensatz zu nationalen Grundrechten liegt der Fokus auf internationalen Rechtsinstrumenten, der Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte und UN-Menschenrechtsmechanismen.
The joined cases IX v Wabe and MH Müller Handels GmbH offered the CJEU a second chance to heed the arguments raised against Achbita and reconsider its decision. Hopes that the Court would be willing to revise Achbita diminished significantly after AG Rantos’s disappointing Opinion in the case. Last week's decision in IX v Wabe to largely uphold Achbita was then also unsurprising, but nevertheless disappointing.
In Fedotova v Russia, the ECtHR found that Russia overstepped the boundaries of its otherwise broad margin of appreciation because it had “no legal framework capable of protecting the applicants’ relationships as same-sex couples has been available under domestic law”. The case foreshadows a future wherein the familiar line of cases advancing the protection of same sex couples will need to be complemented by a jurisprudence that engages with the backslash against LGBTQI rights.
Gut vier Jahre nach den vieldebattierten und -kritisierten „Kopftuch-Entscheidungen“ Achbita und Bougnaoui hatte der EuGH am 15. Juli 2021 erneut über Kopftuchverbote in Form betrieblicher Neutralitätsregelungen zu entscheiden. In seiner jüngsten Entscheidung hat der EuGH seine offene Haltung gegenüber betrieblichen Kopftuchverboten durch seine zumindest punktuell relativiert, und liefert zugleich neuen Input für die Debatte um die Einordnung von Kopftuchverboten als unmittelbare oder mittelbare Diskriminierung, der die Rechtsposition kopftuchtragender Musliminnen langfristig stärken könnte.
On 13 July 2021, the European Court of Human Rights published its judgment in Fedotova and Others v. Russia, a case which concerned the lack of legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the Russian legal system. The judges found the Russian laws to be in violation of Article 8 – the right to respect for private and family life and Article 14 – prohibition of discrimination. However, it is highly unlikely that Russia will enforce the judgment.
The ECtHR judgment M.A. v. Denmark is significant for several reasons. Firstly, because it adds to an already growing international criticism of Denmark’s asylum and immigration policy. Secondly, because the judgment helps clarify the Court’s position on an issue, family reunification for refugees, where case law has hitherto been somewhat ambiguous, and where several European States have introduced new restrictions since 2015. Third, and finally, the judgment represents – to paraphrase Harold Koh - another “way station…in the complex enforcement” of migrant and refugee rights by international human rights institutions.
On 30th June 2021, search-and-rescue activists from Sea-Watch witnessed a brutal attack by the so-called Libyan Coast Guard against a migrant vessel carrying 64 during an attempted pushback. Now, prosecutors in Sicily have launched an investigation against the Libyan Coast Guard for “attempted shipwreck.” This the first time, a European court opens an investigation against the Libyan Coast Guard, and the fact that an Italian court should do so bears legal and political importance.
On 8 July, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in case Shahzad v. Hungary, concerning the denial of access to an asylum procedure and the forced removal of a Pakistani national by Hungarian police officers. The court found that the acts violated the prohibition of collective expulsion as well as the right to an effective remedy. With this decision, the Court on the one hand straightens out some possible misunderstandings, on the other hand returns to the line of argument opened in N.D. and N.T. v. Spain in ways that should be considered more closely.
At the end of 2020, for the first time in its more than 40 years of jurisprudential history, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights declared the arbitrary dismissals of two public prosecutors to be unconventional. Not only judges but also prosecutors are increasingly subject to threats to their independence, both in Latin America and Europe, as well as in other regions. This article addresses the question of whether the same judicial guarantees apply to public prosecutors and attorneys as to judges and looks at how the Inter-American Court sought inspiration from the precedents of the European Court of Human Rights.
On 15 June, the Hungarian Parliament is expected to vote on a legislative package on stricter actions against paedophile offenders. Attached to this noble cause, the ruling party seeks to prohibit the “representation” and “promotion” of LGBTI identities to minors. The proposal would outlaw almost any mention of sexual and gender minorities in schools.
On 4 May 2021, the Nicaraguan National Assembly adopted an electoral reform. Alongside other legislative acts that limit civil society’s operating space, the electoral reform not only sets a gloomy outlook for presidential elections scheduled in Nicaragua for November this year. The reform also violates Inter-American democratic standards as it severely restricts the independence of political parties and leaves the Supreme Electoral Council under significant influence of Nicaragua’s governing party and president.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters