On 16 June 2026, the President of the Court, Mattias Guyomar, addressed the participants of the informal conference of Ministers of Justice of the Council of Europe, held in Strasbourg. Taking place under the Monegasque Presidency of the Committee of Ministers, the conference focused on combating financial crime with an aim to enhance judicial systems’ ability to address current financial and technological threats.
The President of the Court spoke about the Court’s role in ensuring the effectiveness of the fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism.
He noted that the Convention system is particularly well-suited to support and accompany the action of States in combatting financial crime.
“The Convention constitutes the common legal framework in Europe within which the actions carried out by States must unfold,” said President Guyomar, adding that the Convention guarantees contribute to legitimising the measures that States adopt.
Citing the Court’s case-law, the President concluded that the fight against financial crime - a matter of public order and a democratic imperative – should be anchored in a framework that fully respects the rule of law, including at the international level.
- Speech by President Mattias Guyomar (in French only)
On 4 and 5 June 2026, the focal points of the Superior Courts Network, which comprises 112 member courts and eight observer courts, gathered in Strasbourg to share knowledge and advance judicial dialogue.
During the opening session, moderated by the Court’s Jurisconsult, Anna Austin, the President of the Court, Mattias Guyomar, highlighted that such meetings are a practical expression of courts’ shared responsibility for applying the Convention, within a system where the European Court of Human Rights plays a subsidiary supervisory role while domestic courts are at the forefront. He added that this meeting is also an opportunity to develop working relationships and strengthen personal ties.
The President then referred to the topic of Business and Human Rights, a transversal theme for which a new page has been launched on the Court’s Knowledge Sharing platform. The President elaborated on how the Court has dealt with cases concerning business: cases brought by businesses challenging regulations, and cases concerning the State’s positive obligations to regulate business activities where they may have affected the rights of individuals.
In her introductory remarks, the Registrar of the Court, Marialena Tsirli, underlined that the Court has developed the doctrine of “positive obligations”, recognising that States are required not only to refrain from interfering with Convention rights, but also to regulate business actors in order to ensure their effective protection.
Samuel Vuelta Simon, Secretary of State for Justice of Monaco, and Gianluca Esposito, Director General of the Directorate General Human Rights and Rule of Law of the Council of Europe, also addressed the participants during the opening session.
On 1-2 June 2026 the International Congress on the Rule of Law and Judicial Ethics took place at the National High Court of Brazil in Brasilia, assembling Presidents and Chief Justices’ of courts and jurisdictions from across the world, as well as distinguished academics. Hosted by the National High Court of Brazil and its Chief Justice Antonio Herman Benjamin and advised by a committee including Professor Margaret Satterthwaite (United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers) the Congress fostered dialogue among judges on the importance and relevance of ethical frameworks, including the 2002 Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, as well as the necessity of adhering to the judiciaries’ essential values of independence, impartiality and equity. The eight roundtable events addressed different aspects of judicial ethics including on new challenges relating to social media and artificial intelligence. President Guyomar addressed the Congress on Judges and the Rule of Law, and Judicial Independence. The Congress also heard from Chief Justices from superior courts across Europe, South America and Africa, as well as Judicial representatives from other regional courts including the European Court of Justice and the Caribbean Court of Justice.
The Congress was an exceptional meeting at which the European Court participated fully in an international network expressing solidarity between judges. A report summarizing the key points and conclusions will be produced after the event.
President addresses informal conference of Ministers of Justice of the Council of Europe
On 16 June 2026, the President of the Court, Mattias Guyomar, addressed the participants of the informal conference of Ministers of Justice of the Council of Europe, held in Strasbourg. Taking place under the Monegasque Presidency of the Committee of Ministers, the conference focused on combating financial crime with an aim to enhance judicial systems’ ability to address current financial and technological threats.
The President of the Court spoke about the Court’s role in ensuring the effectiveness of the fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism.
He noted that the Convention system is particularly well-suited to support and accompany the action of States in combatting financial crime.
“The Convention constitutes the common legal framework in Europe within which the actions carried out by States must unfold,” said President Guyomar, adding that the Convention guarantees contribute to legitimising the measures that States adopt.
Citing the Court’s case-law, the President concluded that the fight against financial crime - a matter of public order and a democratic imperative – should be anchored in a framework that fully respects the rule of law, including at the international level.
- Speech by President Mattias Guyomar (in French only)
Superior Courts Network Forum takes place in Strasbourg
On 4 and 5 June 2026, the focal points of the Superior Courts Network, which comprises 112 member courts and eight observer courts, gathered in Strasbourg to share knowledge and advance judicial dialogue.
During the opening session, moderated by the Court’s Jurisconsult, Anna Austin, the President of the Court, Mattias Guyomar, highlighted that such meetings are a practical expression of courts’ shared responsibility for applying the Convention, within a system where the European Court of Human Rights plays a subsidiary supervisory role while domestic courts are at the forefront. He added that this meeting is also an opportunity to develop working relationships and strengthen personal ties.
The President then referred to the topic of Business and Human Rights, a transversal theme for which a new page has been launched on the Court’s Knowledge Sharing platform. The President elaborated on how the Court has dealt with cases concerning business: cases brought by businesses challenging regulations, and cases concerning the State’s positive obligations to regulate business activities where they may have affected the rights of individuals.
In her introductory remarks, the Registrar of the Court, Marialena Tsirli, underlined that the Court has developed the doctrine of “positive obligations”, recognising that States are required not only to refrain from interfering with Convention rights, but also to regulate business actors in order to ensure their effective protection.
Samuel Vuelta Simon, Secretary of State for Justice of Monaco, and Gianluca Esposito, Director General of the Directorate General Human Rights and Rule of Law of the Council of Europe, also addressed the participants during the opening session.
Judicial activities
In the case of Iskrenović v. Serbia the Court held that there had been a violation of the right to a fair trial / right to obtain attendance and examination of witnesses.
The case concerned the applicant’s conviction in 2020 in minor-offence proceedings for insulting the police, amid social unrest sparked by governmental restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Court found that the whole case had hinged on the credibility of the arresting police officer’s account which had differed from the one given by the applicant. The applicant’s request that the Serbian courts hear an eyewitness and obtain video footage from surveillance cameras had therefore been neither unreasonable nor vexatious. Such evidence could have shed light on whether the applicant had been near enough to the police officers to insult them or whether it had been the officers who had noticed him and then trailed him. The national courts had, however, failed to properly consider the relevance of such evidence and had not provided sufficient reasons for refusing to obtain and examine it. The applicant’s conviction had ultimately been based essentially on the testimony of the arresting police officer, making it impossible for the defence to effectively challenge the prosecution’s case which had undermined the overall fairness of the proceedings.
- Press release
- Press release (in Serbian)
- Factsheet: COVID-19
In the case of Ottlakán v. Hungary the Court held that there had been a violation of the right to an effective remedy read in conjunction with the right to prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment.
The case concerned the applicant’s complaint that he had not been able to access compensation awarded to him for cramped conditions of detention, because of legislation that had entered into force in 2021. Under that legislation such compensation is set aside in a holding account (administered by the prison) until the prisoner’s release.
The Court found that since there was no review mechanism of the applicant’s whole life sentence which could genuinely lead to his release, he had no prospect of receiving the compensation. Therefore, making the applicant’s release a condition for its payment to him went against the principle of promptness that was required for a remedy to be effective within the meaning of Article 13.
On 15 June 2026, the Grand Chamber panel of five judges decided to reject all six requests for referral to the Grand Chamber.
The Chamber to which the case Knopp v. Hungary had been allocated has relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber.
The case concerns an 88-year-old Hungarian businessman who was under investigation in the United States of America (the USA) for alleged international racketeering. He fears that the Hungarian authorities, at the request of the US authorities, recorded his phone conversations and monitored his emails.
In the case of Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses v. Italy the Court held that there had been a violation of the prohibition of discrimination.
The case concerned a religious association which complained that it had been unable to enter into an agreement with the Italian State, notwithstanding several attempts to do so. Article 8 of the Italian Constitution allowed non-Catholic denominations to enter into such an agreement in order to regulate their relations with the State and thus benefit from the distribution of the “eight per thousand” (otto per mille) raised from income tax. This distribution, which was the funding system for religious denominations in Italy and was intended to support religious activities, was carried out in accordance with, and proportionally to, the choice indicated by citizens on their tax returns.
The Court found that the Government had submitted no arguments capable of leading it to consider that the grounds they had relied on – in particular the applicant association’s position visà- vis the prohibition on receiving blood transfusions and donating blood, and also the choice not to vote in elections –, constituted a breach of the domestic legal order justifying the difference in treatment complained of. In view of those circumstances and notwithstanding the discretion enjoyed by the domestic authorities in this area, the Court considered that it had not been shown that the difference in treatment between the applicant association and the other religious denominations that had been able to enter into agreements with the Italian State had had an “objective and reasonable justification”.
Latest press releases
Transparency and outreach
On 16 June 2026, on the sidelines of the informal conference of Ministers of Justice of the Council of Europe, the Montenegrin Minister of Justice, Bojan Božović, visited the Court, where he was received by President Mattias Guyomar, by the Vice-President of the Court and judge elected in respect of Montenegro, Ivana Jelić, and by the Registrar, Marialena Tsirli.
The President highlighted the key role played by Montenegro in preserving stability, peace and justice in this region of Europe and reaffirmed that the protection of human rights is an indispensable foundation of any democratic society. Vice-President Jelić referred to Montenegro’s cases before the Court and emphasised the positive influence of the Court’s judgments on the national legal system. The Registrar mentioned the secondment of judges as a form of support for the Court.
On the sidelines of the informal conference of Ministers of Justice of the Council of Europe, which took place on 16 June 2026 in Strasbourg, the President of the Court, Mattias Guyomar, met with David van Weel, Minister of Justice and Security of the Netherlands. Corinna Wissels, the judge elected in respect of the Netherlands, and Marialena Tsirli, the Registrar of the Court, also attended the meeting. The parties discussed the Court’s landmark Grand Chamber judgment, Ukraine and the Netherlands v Russia, as well as the importance of accountability for Russia’s full scale invasion of Ukraine.
On 16 June 2026, the President of the Court, Mattias Guyomar, accompanied by the judge elected in respect of Austria, András Jakab, and the Registrar of the Court, Marialena Tsirli, held a meeting with Austria’s Federal Minister of Justice, Dr. Anna Sporrer, on the sidelines of the of the informal conference of Ministers of Justice of the Council of Europe, which took place on 16 June 2026 in Strasbourg. The parties discussed the follow-up to the Chișinău Declaration.
On the agenda
On 15 June 2026 a panel of five judges will examine six Grand Chamber referral requests.
Videos
