The European Court of Human Rights, also known as “The Strasbourg Court”, is an international court of extreme importance. It was established in 1950 by the Council of Europe, initially boasting only 12 members, later extending its influence on 47 states, until in 2022 the membership of the Russian federation was ceased, leaving the Council of Europe with 46 member states.
The Strasbourg court’s main aim is the protection and enforcement of the European Charter of Human Rights, which was signed in Rome in 1950, and is a document of significant relevance for the current geo-political circumstances. The reason behind the creation of such human rights protection network was to ensure effective protection at a regional level; the protection of human rights within the State’s jurisdiction as an international commitment towards other States; the proclamation of a list of human rights that States were internationally bound to recognize; establishing an institutional machinery to ensure respect for HR, by ascertaining violations and providing redress to the individuals concerned; and also establishing an international Court with specific jurisdiction on human rights, empowering it to examining individual complaints against each State Party, which was an extremely revolutionary feature for international law.
HOW AND WHO CAN LODGE A COMPLAINT TO THE STRASBOURG COURT?
According to Article 34 of the ECHR, individual applications can be submitted by a “person”, a “non-governmental organization” (the so-called NGOs) or a “group of persons”. The applicant must claim to be “victim” of a violation of a right recognized by the ECHR or its protocols. The claim must be made against the State, which is responsible for the violation, which becomes the respondent. This is an extremely important feature of the Court because it allows “individuals” who suffered a violation of their human rights by the State, to go to a third and impartial Court and seek protection other than the national one.
It must be stated that the acceptance of the case by the Strasbourg Court is still difficult: the acceptance rate is roughly 5%.
The reasons behind these difficulties are various. First, the are some criteria’s that must be respected. According to Article 35 of the ECHR, the application to the Court can be made once the internal (national) remedies are exhausted, this means that the applicant went through all the steps of the Court’s protection at a national level. After the exhaustion of such remedies, the applicant has only four months from the date when he/she became aware of the final decision to lodge the application to the Strasbourg Court.
Furthermore, the Court has four more boundaries: the alleged violation must fall within the responsibility of a State Party and be claimed by a “private” party (ratione personae); the violation must have taken place within the “jurisdiction” of the States Parties according to article 1 ECHR (ratione loci); the violation must have taken place when the respondent State was already bound by the obligation to respect the right invoked by the applicant (ratione temporis); and finally, the application must fall within the scope of the ECHR or its protocols (ratione materiae).
THE DECISIONS OF THE STRASBOURG COURTS IN RELATION TO GEORGIA
Among the 46 signatory members states there is also Georgia: a country located in the Caucasus region, between Eastern Europe and West Asia.
Georgia firstly joined the Council of Europe in 1999, ratifying the European Convention on Human Rights in the same year. Even though Georgian is not yet part of the European Union, therefore it is not under the influence of the “Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union” and cannot appeal to the Court of Luxembourg, it still tries to obtain transnational protection by bringing cases before the Court of Strasbourg.
According to the European Court of Human Right’s statistics (March 2023) in three-quarters of the judgments delivered concerning Georgia the Court gave a judgment against the State, finding at least one violation of the Convention. The most common violation found was that of article 3 ECHR (prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment), followed by Article 6 ECHR (right to a fair trial) and Article 5 ECHR (Right to liberty and security).
What was the impact of such judgments in Georgia? It led to various reforms and improvements, in particular: enhancing the fairness of judicial proceedings, compensation for victims of Soviet oppression, improvement to conditions and review of detention and the strengthening of freedom of expression.
There are many noteworthy cases and judgments delivered. One of them is Merabishvili v. Georgia(application no. 72508/13) (Register of the Court, 2017), which concerned the arrest and pre-trial detention of a former Prime Minister of Georgia, Ivane Merabishvili, and his complaint that there had been ulterior purposes behind there measures.
The court ruled unanimously that there has been no violation of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security) regarding his arrest or his pre-trial detention; not even the violation of Article 5 § 3 (entitlement of detainee to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial) with regard to his initial placement in pre-trial detention. Nevertheless, the court found violation of Article § 3 in that, at least from 25 September 2013 onwards, his pre-trial detention had ceased to be based on sufficient grounds; and that there had been a violation of Article 18 (limitation on use of restrictions on rights) taken in conjunction with Article 5 § 1.
The Court concluded that even though at first the detention seemed legal and did not focus on Mr Merabishvili’s removal from political scene, later on purposes of the restriction of the right to liberty changed over time: purposes such as to obtain information about Mr Zhvania’s death and Mr Saakashvili’s bank accounts became predominant.
CONCLUSION
The importance of the ECtHR is undisputed worldwide: it is one of the most important means, if not the most important one, for the protection and enforcement of human rights. The role of this Court becomes further important when related to countries that are developing and are trying to fight against corruption present in their country.
Bibliography:
The court in brief - of the European Court of Human Rights. Available at: https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/court_in_brief_eng (Accessed: 01 March 2024).
The European Convention on Human Rights. Available at: https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/Convention_Instrument_ENG (Accessed: 02 March 2024).
The ECHR and Georgia in facts & figures. Available at: https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/Facts_Figures_Georgia_ENG (Accessed: 03 March 2024).
European Convention on Human Rights. Available at: https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/convention_ENG (Accessed: 03 March 2024).
Georgia - of the European Court of Human Rights. Available at: http://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/CP_Georgia_ENG (Accessed: 05 March 2024).
Merabishvili v. Georgia (2017). European Court of Human Right, Grand Chamber. Case no. 72508/13. Available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-178753 (Accessed on: 05 March 2024).
Opmerkingen