Grand Chamber ruling concerning an Inter-State application
In its decision in the case of Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea) the Court has declared the application partly admissible. The decision will be followed by a judgment at a later date.
The case concerns Ukraine’s allegations of a pattern (“administrative practice”) of violations of the European Convention on Human Rights by the Russian Federation in Crimea.
Firstly, the Court identified the scope of the issue before it and held that what was to be decided was whether the alleged pattern of human-rights violations by Russia in Crimea during the relevant period, namely between 27 February 2014 and 26 August 2015, was admissible. The Court held that it was not called upon in the case to decide whether Crimea’s admission, under Russian law, into Russia had been lawful from the standpoint of international law.
The French authorities have introduced a number of restrictions in the framework of the COVID-19 public-health crisis. The Court, while complying with the public-health measures adopted by our host State, in particular by prioritising teleworking and electronic communications, is continuing all its activities in accordance with the usual rules. Unlike during the previous lockdown periods, no special arrangements have been made in respect of procedures and time-limits.
The Court will be delivering its ruling in the case of Georgia v. Russia (II) at a public hearing on 21 January 2021.
The case concerns the armed conflict which broke out between Georgia and the Russian Federation in August 2008 and its consequences.
The application was declared admissible in 2011 after a Chamber hearing. The Chamber in question thereafter declined jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber.
Webcast of the hearing (23/05/2018)...
Hearings in January22/12/2020
The Court will be holding two Grand Chamber hearings in January 2021.
Khasanov and Rakhmanov v. Russia concerns the applicants’ allegation that they risked ill-treatment if extradited to Kyrgyzstan because they belonged to the Uzbek ethnic minority, who have been persecuted by the authorities since interethnic clashes in 2010.
Abdi Ibrahim v. Norway concerns the decision by the Norwegian authorities to allow the adoption of a child by a foster family against his mother’s wishes....
Judgment concerning France14/01/2021
In the case of Société Éditrice de Mediapart and Others v. France the Court held that there had been no violation of the Convention.
The cases concerned an order issued against Mediapart, a news website, its director of publication and a journalist to remove from the news company’s website extracts of illegal recordings made at the home of Liliane Bettencourt, principal shareholder of the group L’Oréal.
The Court reiterated the principle that journalists could not claim exclusive immunity from criminal liability for the sole reason that the offence in question was committed during the performance of their journalistic functions. Furthermore, the fact that an individual belonged to the category of public figures did not authorise the media to violate the professional and ethical principles which had to govern their actions, or legitimise intrusions into private life....
Judgment concerning Croatia14/01/2021
In the case of Sabalić v. Croatia the Court found a violation of the prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment and the prohibition of discrimination.
In 2010 the applicant was violently attacked in a nightclub by a man whose advances she had refused and to whom she had disclosed that she was a lesbian. Her aggressor was prosecuted in minor-offence proceedings for a breach of public peace and order and was given a fine of around 40 euros. A criminal complaint by the applicant was rejected on grounds of double jeopardy.
The Court held that the institution of minor-offence proceedings had not demonstrated that the State was committed to ensuring that homophobic violence was in no way tolerated; indeed, such a response had fostered a sense of impunity for acts of violent hate crime....
Judgment concerning Denmark12/01/2021
In the cases of Munir Johana v. Denmark and Khan v. Denmark the Court held that there had been no violation of the Convention on account of the decision to expel the applicants from Denmark.
The applicants, an Iraqi national born in Denmark and a Pakistani national living in Denmark from a very young age, had several criminal convictions and orders had been issued for their expulsion.
The Court held that the Danish authorities had taken into account the applicants’ particular circumstances, in particular the specific crimes and their prior criminal records, and that their ties to Denmark had been properly examined....
Visit by the "Contrôleure générale des lieux de privation de liberté" of France12/01/2021
On 12 January 2021, Dominique Simonnot, Contrôleure générale des lieux de privation de liberté (General Inspector of all places of deprivation of liberty) of France, visited the Court and was received by President Robert Spano. Mattias Guyomar, judge elected in respect of France and Abel Campos, Deputy Registrar, also attended the meeting....
Forthcoming Judgments & Decisions