![]() Even if a case brought by an individual was declared admissible, it could only be put before the Court by the Commission or by one of the Member States, not by the individual herself. The Commission could declare a case admissible or inadmissible but could not judge on the substance of the matter, a task which was left to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). KeywordsĪlthough initially, both states and individuals (natural persons, groups and legal persons) could submit a complaint under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the latter category could do so only with the former European Commission on Human Rights (ECmHR). Doing so, it has gradually turned into a European Constitutional Court, in particular for privacy cases. ![]() Propelled by cases revolving around mass surveillance activities, in just a couple small number of years, the Court has undergone a revolutionary transformation and now formally assesses the quality of Member States’ laws and even advises Member States’ legislative branch on how to amend its legal system in order to be Convention-compliant. One thing it did not, assess however, and that was scrutinising laws and policies as such, assessing whether Member States’ legislative branch had respected the principles of the rule of law and the minimum requirements of good law-making. ![]() Until very recently, the European Court of Human Rights was willing to assess whether Member States’ executive branch had operated on a legal basis, whether national courts had struck a fair balance when adjudicating cases, and whether Member States had a positive obligation to ensure adequate protection of citizens’ human rights.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |