Chamber News


Roof of the hearing room 1 of the Human Rights building
16/04/24

In the case of Guðmundur Gunnarsson and Magnús Davíð Norðdahl v. Iceland the ECHR held that there had been a violation of the right to free elections and of the right to an effective remedy in conjunction with Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention.

The case concerned alleged irregularities in the recount of votes in the Northwest constituency in the 2021 Althingi election, subsequent changes in the allocation of levelling seats, and the examination of the post-election complaints by Althingi. The applicants were the unsuccessful candidates in that constituency.

The Court found that while the procedure for the examination of the applicants’ complaints by Althingi had been fair and objective and had guaranteed a sufficiently reasoned decision, it had lacked the necessary impartiality safeguards and had been characterised by virtually unrestrained discretion.

Human Rights building
09/04/24

In the case of Georgia v. Russia (IV) the Court held that there had been several violations of the Convention.

The case concerned the human-rights toll caused by the hardening of the administrative boundary lines after the armed conflict between Georgia and Russia in August 2008.

The Court found that it had sufficient evidence to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the incidents alleged were not isolated and were sufficiently numerous and interconnected to amount to a pattern or system of violations. Moreover, the apparent lack of an effective investigation into the incidents and the general application of the measures to all people concerned proved that such practices had been officially tolerated by the Russian authorities.

Main hall of the Human Rights building
09/04/24

In the case of E.L. v. Lithuania the Court held that there had been a violation of the right to prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment/investigation.

The case concerned the applicant’s allegation that he had been sexually abused by three older boys when placed in a children’s hom.

The Court found that both the prosecuting authorities and the courts had been reluctant to order or to explicitly address the need for a comprehensive psychiatric and psychological examination in connection with the alleged abuse, despite the applicant’s requests. The authorities had therefore failed in their Convention duty to effectively investigate the applicant’s allegation of ill-treatment.

Human Rights building in winter
09/04/24

In the cases of Matthews and Johnson v. Romania and Lazăr v. Romania the Court held that there had been no violation of the right to liberty and security and that the complaint concerning the prohibition on inhuman or degrading treatment was inadmissible.

The case concerned the applicants’ detention and the Romanian courts’ ordering their extradition to the United States in March 2021. All three applicants were wanted for, among other charges, racketeering, drugs and money-laundering offences.

The Court found that the applicants had failed to show that they were at risk of life imprisonment without parole if extradited to the US, noting the sentencing practice in similar cases before trial courts in the US.

Responsive Image

Delivered Judgments and Decisions


Responsive Image

Forthcoming Judgments & Decisions


Grand Chamber News


Grand Chamber file
17/04/24

The Chamber to which the case C.O.C.G. and Others v. Lithuania had been allocated has relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber.

The case concerns four Cuban nationals and their repeated attempts to enter Lithuania by crossing the border with Belarus. The applicants submit that on each attempt Lithuanian border guards pushed them back, at gunpoint, into Belarusian territory, without giving them an opportunity to submit asylum applications. They have eventually entered Lithuania and have been apprehended. The case also concerns their subsequent deprivation of liberty in a centre for asylum seekers.

Main hearing room of the Human Rights building
09/04/24

On 8 April 2024, the Grand Chamber panel of five judges decided to reject all ten requests for referral to the Grand Chamber.

Judges of the ECHR
02/04/24

On 8 April 2024 a panel of 5 judges will examine ten Grand Chamber referral requests.

Communication of cases


Responsive Image
04/03/24

The Court has communicated to the Government of Lithuania the application Al-Nashiri v. Lithuania and has asked them to submit their observations on its admissibility and merits.

The case concerns a national of Saudi Arabia currently detained in Guantánamo Bay and facing capital charges before a United States (US) military commission on suspicion of, among other things, the bombing of the US Navy ship USS Cole in 2000. The US authorities consider him to have been one of the most senior figures in al-Qaeda.

In his case before the ECHR, the applicant raises multiple complaints of torture, ill-treatment and unacknowledged detention when he was held for five months in 2005-2006 at a secret facility in Lithuania run by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

Hearings


Grand Chamber hearing in the case of Ships Waste Oil Collector B.V. and Others v. the Netherlands
06/03/24

The Court held a Grand Chamber hearing in the case of Ships Waste Oil Collector B.V. and Others v. the Netherlands.

The case concerns the transmission of data, lawfully obtained in a criminal investigation, to another law enforcement authority, the Competition Authority, which used those data in an investigation into the applicant company’s involvement in price-fixing.

Decisions


Main hall of the Human Rights building
01/02/24

The ECHR has declared inadmissible the application in the case of Ramadan v. France.

The case concerned the applicant’s conviction for having disseminated information about the identity of the presumed victim of a rape for which he was facing trial.

The Court noted that the domestic courts had clarified the concept of a “victim” for the purposes of the Freedom of the Press Act and had reaffirmed that only written authorisation from the person who had lodged the criminal complaint and joined the proceedings as a civil party could have released the applicant from his criminal liability under the law by waiving the duty of secrecy and allowing the dissemination of her identity.

The Court saw no reason to question the assessment by the domestic courts, which had weighed the applicant’s rights and those of the victim in the balance and had arrived at a solution based on relevant and sufficient grounds and found that the impugned interference with the applicant’s freedom of expression had been proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued.

Other News


17/04/24

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has elected Úna Ní Raifeartaigh as judge to the Court in respect of Ireland and Artūrs Kučs as judge to the Court in respect of Latvia.

15/04/24

On 15 April 2024, Abdelkarim Boujradi, Secretary General of the Inter-Ministerial Delegation for Human Rights of Morocco, visited the Court and was received by Vice-President Georges Ravarani. Abel Campos, Deputy Registrar of the Court, also attended the meeting.

12/04/24

On 12 April 2024 President Síofra O’Leary received an official visit by a high-level delegation of judges from the United Kingdom Superior Courts, composed of: The Right Honourable Lord Philip Sales, Justice of the UK Supreme Court; The Right Honourable the Baroness Carr of Walton-on-the-Hill, Lady Chief Justice of England and Wales; The Right Honourable Dame Siobhan Keegan, Lady Chief Justice of Northern Ireland; The Right Honourable Lord Andrew Burrows, Justice of the UK Supreme Court; The Right Honourable Lord Justice James Dingemans, Court of Appeal Judge, England and Wales; and The Right Honourable Lord Raymond Doherty, Court of Session Judge, Scotland. During the visit the delegation took part in roundtable discussions with judges of the Court and members of the Registry.