03 December 2021
A Mugemangango v. Belgium Sequel in the Making
The 25 September 2021 parliamentary elections in Iceland were challenged due to alleged irregularities in the election process of the Northwest-constituency (Norðvesturkjördæmi). On 25 November 2021, the Icelandic Parliament ruled on the validity of the 25 September 2021 parliamentary elections. Individuals as well as a legal entity have stated their intent to file a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights for the alleged violations of the European Convention on Human Rights. If they go forward, they are likely to succeed as Icelandic law fails to meet the standards set out by the ECtHR for post-election review. Continue reading >>
0 
12 April 2021
Is Compulsory Vaccination Compulsory?
On Thursday 8 April 2021, the European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment in Vavřička and others v. the Czech Republic. The Grand Chamber ruled strongly (16:1) in favour of the Czech government, granting the state a wide margin of appreciation in the assessment of the need for compulsory vaccination of children. In light of the COVID-related challenges, it is important that the Court took a clear stance regarding the importance of vaccination. At the same time, however, it is regrettable that the Court did not offer a stronger and more coherent reasoning justifying its value-driven decision. Continue reading >>
0
02 December 2020
A New Nail in the Coffin for the 2017 Polish Judicial Reform
On 1 December the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR gave an important ruling that may have wide-reaching implications for the ongoing attempts to curb the rule of law backsliding in Poland and other countries. The case addresses the appointment of judges, and the way this affects the status of a court as a “tribunal established by law” in the meaning of Article 6 of the ECHR. Continue reading >>19 October 2020
Towards a European Court of Fundamental Rights
With its judgments on bulk data retention issued at the beginning of this month, the European Court of Justice has entitled itself to examine virtually all surveillance measures in the digital sphere. In doing so, it has once more clarified its positioning as the decisive Fundamental Rights Court in Europe. In the midst of the ultra vires-storm caused by the PSPP-judgement of the Bundesverfassungsgericht – and questions arising with regard to German Legal Hegemony in Europe – a true shift of power to the ECJ can be spotted which is, surprisingly, supported by the national constitutional courts. Continue reading >>
0
25 September 2020
Bad Role Models
Over the past several months, there has been an increase in asylum seekers and refugees crossing the English Channel in small inflatable boats. This prompted the UK government to propose stemming arrivals with an Australian-style approach: ‘pushing back’ boats to France before they can reach British territorial waters. The UK already funds France to prevent asylum seekers leaving French territory through ‘pullback’ measures. Such pushback and pullback practices likely violate several international refugee, human rights and law of the sea obligations. Continue reading >>07 July 2020
Strasbourg Steps in
In recent months, the European Court of Human Rights has communicated to the Government of the Republic of Poland several important cases concerning changes in the judiciary. Potential Strasbourg judgements may be important in containing further undermining of the independence of the judiciary and may complement measures taken at the European Union level. Continue reading >>
0
06 May 2020
Expelled from Humanity
The decision of the European Court of Human Rights in M.N. and Others v. Belgium will undoubtedly further propel the debate on the scope of extraterritorial state jurisdiction. More importantly, however, it reveals the necessity of addressing the systemic exclusion of refugees from the international legal order. Continue reading >>
0
10 April 2020
Covid-19 and Derogations Before the European Court of Human Rights
Many argue that derogations, permitted under many human rights instruments, provide a useful framework for assessing whether any human rights infringements that arise from emergency provisions adopted in response to Covid-19 are justified. Drawing on jurisprudence from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or the Court) in relation to Northern Ireland, this post argues that it is likely that the vast majority of cases exploring derogation will be found in a government’s failure. Continue reading >>
0
12 February 2020
Kolevi: Bulgaria’s 10-Year Cat-and-Mouse Game with the Council of Europe and the Venice Commission
A cat-and-mouse game perfectly describes Bulgaria’s stubborn refusal to comply with Kolevi v Bulgaria, which requires a reform of Bulgaria’s Prosecutor’s Office, and it has been going on for a decade. The latest trick pulled out of the bag is quite original – Bulgaria’s government essentially asked Bulgaria’s Constitutional Court to clarify if some of the concerns raised by the Venice Commission were reasonable, and this court deemed the question admissible. Continue reading >>20 January 2020
Why the Turkish Constitutional Court’s Wikipedia Decision is No Reason to Celebrate
The Turkish Constitutional Court (TCC) recently lifted the ban on Wikipedia and a surge of, in my view, unwarranted optimism has now sprung out of nowhere both among international and Turkish circles following the case closely. I fail to share this optimism. By all means, the lifting of the ban on Wikipedia is something to be happy about. But the timing and content of the TCC’s decision, when especially read through the political context in which it was handed down, do not give much reason to celebrate. Continue reading >>
0