06
Nov
2026
President Guyomar addresses the Committee of Ministers
On 21 October 2026, the President of the Court, Mattias Guyomar, addressed the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers as part of his regular twice-yearly exchange of views, providing an in-depth overview of the Court’s work over the past six months, with a particular focus on the priorities of his Presidency: efficiency, visibility and responsibility.
On efficiency, the President presented an overview of the Court’s judicial activity, supported by statistical data, and described the initiatives undertaken by the Court to improve its working methods and procedures.
On visibility, President Guyomar highlighted three key dimensions: communication and cooperation within the Council of Europe; engagement with national authorities, international organisations and other partners of the Court; and outreach and communication activities aimed at both the media and the general public.
On responsibility, he noted that accountability and judicial independence go hand in hand, and highlighted the importance of shared responsibility with national authorities in implementing the European Convention.
At the conclusion of his address, the President participated in an exchange of views with the Committee of Ministers and responded to questions from its members.
Advisory opinion on the obligation for lawyers to appear in person before disciplinary bodies
On 20 October 2026 the Court delivered its opinion in response to a request submitted by the Constitutional Court of Luxembourg.
The request concerned the compatibility with Article 6 (right to a fair hearing) of the Convention of the obligation for a lawyer facing disciplinary proceedings to appear in person at the hearing before the disciplinary body and, in the event of failure to do so, the resulting inability to be represented by counsel instead and to apply to the body in question to set aside an adverse decision entered in default (section 26 of the Law of 10 August 1991).
European Court of Human Rights wins award for protecting judicial independence
On 18 October 2026 the European Court of Human Rights was awarded the Judicial Independence Award 2026 by the International Association of Judges (IAJ). Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judge elected in respect of Portugal, attended the award ceremony in Lisbon to receive the award on the Court’s behalf.
Commenting via video message yesterday, Mattias Guyomar, the Court’s President, said that the Court has for more than seven decades been a beacon to protect the rule of law and judicial independence. He emphasised that it is currently all the more important to stand with judges, given the attacks and pressures they are facing, and thanked the IAJ for recognising the Court’s work in defending peace and the European legal order.
The Hague: Court President expresses judicial solidarity with the International Criminal Court
On 15 October 2026, the President of the Court, Mattias Guyomar, visited the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, where he met with its President, Judge Tomoko Akane. The meeting provided an opportunity for President Guyomar to express in person and on behalf of the Court judicial solidarity with the ICC at a time when it has been subject to sanction as an institution, and certain judges and prosecutors have been designated.
President Guyomar stressed the importance of standing with judges who face attacks and pressure because of their judicial work.
The President underlined that such attacks strike at the very foundations of the international legal order adding that peace should be defended through law and justice.
President Guyomar addresses the Committee of Ministers
On 21 October 2026, the President of the Court, Mattias Guyomar, addressed the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers as part of his regular twice-yearly exchange of views, providing an in-depth overview of the Court’s work over the past six months, with a particular focus on the priorities of his Presidency: efficiency, visibility and responsibility.
On efficiency, the President presented an overview of the Court’s judicial activity, supported by statistical data, and described the initiatives undertaken by the Court to improve its working methods and procedures.
On visibility, President Guyomar highlighted three key dimensions: communication and cooperation within the Council of Europe; engagement with national authorities, international organisations and other partners of the Court; and outreach and communication activities aimed at both the media and the general public.
On responsibility, he noted that accountability and judicial independence go hand in hand, and highlighted the importance of shared responsibility with national authorities in implementing the European Convention.
At the conclusion of his address, the President participated in an exchange of views with the Committee of Ministers and responded to questions from its members.
Advisory opinion on the obligation for lawyers to appear in person before disciplinary bodies
On 20 October 2026 the Court delivered its opinion in response to a request submitted by the Constitutional Court of Luxembourg.
The request concerned the compatibility with Article 6 (right to a fair hearing) of the Convention of the obligation for a lawyer facing disciplinary proceedings to appear in person at the hearing before the disciplinary body and, in the event of failure to do so, the resulting inability to be represented by counsel instead and to apply to the body in question to set aside an adverse decision entered in default (section 26 of the Law of 10 August 1991).
Judicial activities
22/10/26
Measures under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court are decided in connection with proceedings before the Court, without prejudging any subsequent decisions on the admissibility or merits of the case.
22/10/26
Court of Cassation did not lack impartiality in Silvio Berlusconi’s conviction proceedings.
In the case of Berlusconi v. Italy the Court held that there had been no violation of the right to a fair trial in respect of the complaint that the Court of Cassation had lacked impartiality.
The case concerned the applicant’s complaint of unfairness regarding his criminal conviction for a tax evasion scheme implemented through Mediaset S.p.A. and other companies in the same group, in connection with the purchase of television rights.
The Court found that the applicant had not shown that the bench of the Court of Cassation dealing with his case, and in particular the President of the Division to which the case had been allocated, had lacked impartiality.
22/10/26
Incomplete enforcement of domestic judgments favouring applicant judges did not violate Convention.
The Court has declared inadmissible the applications in the case of Puşcaşu and Others v. Romania as being manifestly ill-founded.
The case concerned the failure to fully enforce court decisions ordering the Romanian State to pay the applicants, all judges or former judges, various sums of money as compensation for pay practices that had been found to be discriminatory in comparison with other categories of judges, prosecutors and civil servants.
- Press release
- Press release (in Romanian)
15/10/26
Civil compensation remedy effective for inadequate detention conditions
In the case of Zakutniy and Others v. Ukraine, the ECHR held that there had been no violation of the right to an effective remedy.
The case concerned the effectiveness of the compensatory remedy available under national law in respect of complaints concerning inadequate conditions of detention.
The Court found that, despite certain shortcomings, a civil claim for compensation brought under Articles 1173 and 1174 of the Civil Code could, in principle, be regarded as effective. Accordingly, where a complaint regarding inadequate conditions of detention was made, applicants were expected to make use of that legal avenue before lodging their complaints with the Court.
- Press release
- Press release (in Ukrainian)
15/10/26
European Court accepts advisory opinion request from the Supreme Court of the Netherlands concerning review mechanism of a final acquittal for murder.
The ECHR has accepted a request for an advisory opinion submitted by the Supreme Court of the Netherlands.
The request concerns legislation which entered into force in the Netherlands in 2013 making it possible to seek review of an acquittal which had become final, to the detriment of a former defendant.
In 2025 the Board of Procurators General filed an application for review of a former defendant’s acquittal of murder, based on the results of DNA analysis obtained through techniques not available at the time of his trial. The application for review seeks to have the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which have been amended and have entered into force since the former defendant’s acquittal in 2012, applied retroactively.
Press releases on other judgments and decisions
22/10/26
22 October: 26 Judgments & 46 Decisions
20 October: 7 Judgments
Transparency and outreach
On the agenda
Videos
