23
Jun
2026
President holds series of meetings with Justice Ministers
On the sidelines of the informal conference of Ministers of Justice of the Council of Europe, held on 16 June 2026 in Strasbourg, the President of the Court, Mattias Guyomar, held a series of bilateral meetings with Justice Ministers.
At the Court, President Guyomar, accompanied by Vice President and judge elected in respect of Montenegro, Ivana Jelić, and the Registrar, Marialena Tsirli, met with Bojan Božović, Minister of Justice of Montenegro.
In addition, President Guyomar, accompanied by András Jakab, the judge elected in respect of Austria, and Registrar Marialena Tsirli, held a meeting with Austria’s Federal Minister for Justice, Dr Anna Sporrer.
The President also met with David van Weel, Minister of Justice and Security of the Netherlands, together with Corinna Wissels, the judge elected in respect of the Netherlands, and Registrar Marielana Tsirli.
On 15 June, the Court President received the Minister of Justice of Albania, Toni Gogu, The judge elected in respect of Albania, Darian Pavli, and the Deputy Registrar, Abel Campos, also attended the meeting.
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.
President holds series of meetings with Justice Ministers
On the sidelines of the informal conference of Ministers of Justice of the Council of Europe, held on 16 June 2026 in Strasbourg, the President of the Court, Mattias Guyomar, held a series of bilateral meetings with Justice Ministers.
At the Court, President Guyomar, accompanied by Vice President and judge elected in respect of Montenegro, Ivana Jelić, and the Registrar, Marialena Tsirli, met with Bojan Božović, Minister of Justice of Montenegro.
In addition, President Guyomar, accompanied by András Jakab, the judge elected in respect of Austria, and Registrar Marialena Tsirli, held a meeting with Austria’s Federal Minister for Justice, Dr Anna Sporrer.
The President also met with David van Weel, Minister of Justice and Security of the Netherlands, together with Corinna Wissels, the judge elected in respect of the Netherlands, and Registrar Marielana Tsirli.
On 15 June, the Court President received the Minister of Justice of Albania, Toni Gogu, The judge elected in respect of Albania, Darian Pavli, and the Deputy Registrar, Abel Campos, also attended the meeting.
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)
Judicial activities
23/06/26
Annulment of presidential pardons was justified, but fair trial rights violated for two of the three applicants
In the case of Taleski and Others v. North Macedonia the Court held that there had been no violation of the right to a fair trial on account of the legislative intervention permitting the annulment of the presidential pardons and the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the applicants. The Court also held that there had been:
- a violation of the right to a fair trial as regards the right to an adversarial trial on account of the failure to serve one of the applicants, Mr Mitrovski, with a copy of the higher prosecutor’s submissions; and
- a violation of the right to a fair trial as regards the right to an adversarial trial on account of the failure to serve another of the applicants, Mr Janakieski, with a copy of the higher prosecutor’s submissions.
The case concerned a legislative intervention, the 2016 Pardon Act, which permitted the annulment of presidential pardons that had been granted to the applicants six weeks earlier and which, at the time, had been considered to be final and irrevocable. As a consequence, the pardons were annulled and the applicants, who were public officials, were prosecuted for abuse of official position and authority and various electoral offences. The case also concerned the fairness of those criminal proceedings.
22/06/26
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.
16/06/26
Remedy for cramped conditions of detention ineffective for whole life sentence prisoner with no prospect of receiving compensation.
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.
16/06/26
Belgrade COVID19 protestor’s conviction in 2020 decided in unfair proceedings.
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
15/06/26
On 15 June 2026, the Grand Chamber panel of five judges decided to reject all six requests for referral to the Grand Chamber.
12/06/26
Grand Chamber to examine case concerning alleged secret surveillance of Hungarian businessman.
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.
Press releases on other judgments and decisions
23/06/26
Transparency and outreach
On the agenda
29
Jun
2026
30
Jun
2026
Videos
