European Human Rights - Lecture 2
Complaint procedures and Admissibility
Conditions
Individual complaint procedure ECHR
History
The Convention was signed the 4th of November 1950 by 14 States. It
took three years before it entered into force, the 3rd of September 1953.
By then it was ratified by 10 States. What you couldn’t do at that moment
was complain before any organs.
Until 1998 there were three organs dealing with assessment of complaints:
- European Commission of Human Rights
- European Court of Human Rights
- Committee of Ministers of Council of Europe
But why? For the first time in history it was accepted that there should be
a right for individuals to complain against their States. There was no
experience with complaints about violation of human rights by individuals.
States were afraid for frivolous and politically motivated complaints
(looking back at propaganda and the Cold War). That’s why this system
was developed:
For acceptance of this right and the supervisory mechanism that came
with it, two special declarations were considered necessary by States:
- Right to petition with Commission (1955)
- Compulsory jurisdiction of Court (1959)
What was the structure? Until 1998 there was a system of submission of
your application with the Commission and it decided whether or not the
application was admissible or inadmissible and if admissible, made up
reports on merits (an advice on violation or not). That report could do two
things:
- Send the report to Court if defendant State had accepted the
jurisdiction of the Court. The report was send to Court by Commission
or State. The individual did not have the right to send a report to Court
(only from 1994 onwards).
- Send the report to the Commission to the Committee of Ministers if the
defendant State hadn’t accepted the jurisdiction of Court.
Why a decision by Committee of Ministers? States found it necessary that
a final binding decision would be taken. But in 1998 there was a change of
system. The double system wasn’t efficient anymore because the number
of applications was really high. Also new State became Member of the
Convention. States had to accept:
- Mandatory right of individual application
- Full-time single Court
- Wholly judicial procedure
Complaint procedures and Admissibility
Conditions
Individual complaint procedure ECHR
History
The Convention was signed the 4th of November 1950 by 14 States. It
took three years before it entered into force, the 3rd of September 1953.
By then it was ratified by 10 States. What you couldn’t do at that moment
was complain before any organs.
Until 1998 there were three organs dealing with assessment of complaints:
- European Commission of Human Rights
- European Court of Human Rights
- Committee of Ministers of Council of Europe
But why? For the first time in history it was accepted that there should be
a right for individuals to complain against their States. There was no
experience with complaints about violation of human rights by individuals.
States were afraid for frivolous and politically motivated complaints
(looking back at propaganda and the Cold War). That’s why this system
was developed:
For acceptance of this right and the supervisory mechanism that came
with it, two special declarations were considered necessary by States:
- Right to petition with Commission (1955)
- Compulsory jurisdiction of Court (1959)
What was the structure? Until 1998 there was a system of submission of
your application with the Commission and it decided whether or not the
application was admissible or inadmissible and if admissible, made up
reports on merits (an advice on violation or not). That report could do two
things:
- Send the report to Court if defendant State had accepted the
jurisdiction of the Court. The report was send to Court by Commission
or State. The individual did not have the right to send a report to Court
(only from 1994 onwards).
- Send the report to the Commission to the Committee of Ministers if the
defendant State hadn’t accepted the jurisdiction of Court.
Why a decision by Committee of Ministers? States found it necessary that
a final binding decision would be taken. But in 1998 there was a change of
system. The double system wasn’t efficient anymore because the number
of applications was really high. Also new State became Member of the
Convention. States had to accept:
- Mandatory right of individual application
- Full-time single Court
- Wholly judicial procedure
