Sanctions for Violations of the European Convention on Human Rights by Signatory States
Download
Read an extract
Themes
European Convention on Human Rights, European Court of Human Rights, sanctions, signatory states, violations, compliance, effectiveness
Reader
Abstract
Extract
of 3
Abstract
This document provides an analysis of the sanctions imposed by the European Court of Human Rights on signatory states for violating the European Convention on Human Rights. It discusses the principles underlying these sanctions, the means of fulfilling obligations, and the effectiveness of these sanctions in promoting compliance with the Convention.
Extract
[...] The Court of Cassation also specifies that such a decision is in no way contrary to the 'right to respect for private and family life' guaranteed by Article 8 of the ECHR and to the 'best interests of the child' guaranteed by Article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child." On what principle did the European Court of Human Rights rely to condemn France in its judgment of 26 June 2014? Explain why? The California Supreme Court ruled on July that a child born through a gestational carrier would have its 'genetic father' as its father and not the gestational carrier, but the intended mother (wife of the genetic father). The French Court of Cassation refused the transcription of this birth in the French civil register by a decision of 6 April 2011. [...]
[...] This justifies the significant difference in the number of cases, as it handles more than 65,000 cases per year. More numerous, the judgments have a much less significant impact than those of the CJEU. While they are binding and declaratory, it is up to the condemned State to determine the means of fulfilling the obligation incumbent upon it (ECHR June 1979, Marckx; CE October 2012, Baumet). There is therefore a certain latitude in the sanctioning of violations by signatory states. These sanctions may appear ineffective in certain situations. [...]
[...] While the European Court of Human Rights acknowledges that France does not deny the bond of parentage with the genetic father and the intended mother, it refuses to recognize this bond under domestic law. The European Court of Human Rights therefore condemns this 'contradiction' which undermines the rights guaranteed by Article 8 of the ECHR. How are violations of the European Convention on Human Rights by signatory states sanctioned? Do you think these sanctions are effective? There is a genuine dialogue and joint construction between the signatory states and the ECHR when it sanctions violations of the ECHR. [...]
[...] For example, on the issue of prisoner voting rights, the ECHR condemned the United Kingdom in and 2015 (ECHR October 2005, Hirst v. United Kingdom; 23 November 2010, Greens and MT v. United Kingdom; 10 February 2015, Mc Hugh and others v. United Kingdom). However, the British Parliament refuses to move on this point and therefore completely disregards the ECHR's jurisprudence. Another example in France, on the nationality of children born from a GPA practiced abroad - if national jurisdictions have followed the ECHR's position, there is still a political debate on the subject. [...]
[...] Seized by the President of the Hungarian Supreme Court, the ECHR also condemned Hungary for failing to meet the obligation of independence and impartiality of the judiciary (ECHR June 2016, Baka v. Hungary). To date, Hungary has not taken this judgment into account. Russia, also, after being condemned in the name of respect for property by the ECHR (ECHR July 2014), revised its Constitution to introduce a provision according to which it can disregard ECHR decisions that would be contrary to Russian constitutional requirements. Finally, there are still political debates that cannot be overcome. [...]
