DOCSLIB.ORG

Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights the European Commission and European Court of Human Rights

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights the European Commission and European Court of Human Rights YEARBOOK OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS YEARBOOK OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION AND EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS THE GREEK CASE MARTINUS NIJHOFF / THE HAGUE / 1972 © I972 by Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1972 All rights reserved, including the rights to translate or to reproduce this book or parts thereof in atry form ISBN 978-94-015-1226-8 ISBN 978-94-015-1224-4 (eBook) DOT 10.1007/978-94-015-1224-4 Introduction This Volume contains the Report of the European Commission of Human Rights on the "Greek Case" (Applications No. 3321/67, Den­ mark v. Greece; No. 3322/67, Norway v. Greece; No. 3323/67, Sweden v. Greece; No. 3344/67, Netherlands v. Greece) and the Resolution DH (70) 1 adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 15 April 1970 relating to this case. These four applications, which were filed with the Commission of Human Rights in September 1967, alleged that the Greek Government which had come into power in April of that year had violated its obliga­ tions under the European Convention on Human Rights. They referred to the suspension of certain articles of the Greek Constitution and other legislative measures and administrative practices; they alleged that, re­ gardless of any individual or specific injury, these acts affected the cor­ responding Articles of the Convention on Human Rights. The Applicant Governments also submitted that the derogation made by the Greek Government under Article 15 of the Convention (which permits a government to take measures derogating from its obligations under the Convention in time of war or public emergency) was not justified. The Commission on 2 October 1967, decided to give priority to these cases and, after hearing the submissions of the parties on 23 and 24 January 1968, it declared the applications admissible on 24 January 1968. The decision on admissibility was published in this Yearbook Vol. 11, pages 690 to 728. In March 1968, the three Scandinavian Governments added new allega­ tions, alleging numerous cases of torture or ill-treatment of political prisoners amounting to an administrative practice, contrary to Article 3 of the Convention; alleging that the Constitutional Act "Eta" of 11 July 1967 constituted retroactive penal legislation, contrary to Article 7, and introduced measures of confiscation, contrary to Article 1 of the First Protocol; and, finally, that the absence of free elections, which prevented the people from freely expressing their opinion in the choice of the legis­ lature, was contrary to Article 3 of the First Protocol. On 31 May 1968, the Commission, again after hearing the submissions of the Parties, declared these new allegations admissible. The second decision of the Commission on admissibility was published in Volume 11 of this Year­ book at pages 730 to 780. The Sub-Commission, which was set up to ascertain the facts of the case, held various sessions during 1968 and 1969 and heard a large number of witnesses. (Yearbook Vol. 11, page 58; Yearbook Vol. 12, page 104). VI INTRODUCTION On 18 November 1969 the Commission of Human Rights transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe the report which it had drawn up in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention. After three months had elapsed without the case being referred to the European Court of Human Rights, the Committee of Ministers, in accordance with Article 32 of the Convention, adopted on 15 April 1970 its Resolution DH (70) 1. At the same meeting, the Committee of Ministers decided to authorise the publication of the Report of the Commission on the above mentioned applications. In the meantime, at the Forty-Fifth Session of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, on 12 December 1969, when the Committee was discussing certain recommendations of the Consultative Assembly relating to the situation in Greece, the Greek Government denounced the Statute of the Council of Europe and the European Con­ vention on Human Rights (Yearbook Vol. 12, pages 78 to 84). In accordance with Article 65 (1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Greek denunciation had the effect that Greece ceased to be a party to the Convention on 13 June 1970. This Volume contains the Report of the European Commission of Human Rights on the "Greek Case" in a slightly abbreviated form, and the Resolution of the Committee of Ministers of 15 April 1970. For reasons of space, several of the Annexes to Chapter IV and several of the Appendices to the Report as a whole are omitted from this edition; their absence, however, will not deprive the reader of any essential information. In accordance with the constant practice of the Committee of Ministers, that part of the Report relating to the attempt to reach a friendly settlement remains confidential and is therefore not published. Departing from the usual practice, and as a quite exceptional measure, this Volume contains only the English text, which is the original text, of the Report. The full text of the French translation, in a roneotyped edition, may be obtained on request from the Directorate of Human Rights, Council of Europe, Strasbourg. A. H. ROBERTSON Strasbourg, Head of the Directorate 30 July, 1971 of Human Rights SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction V REPORT OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ON THE "GREEK CASE" 1 INTRODUCTION 5 PART A: History of Proceedings and Points at Issue 9 PART B: Establishment of the Facts and Opinions of the Commission: CHAPTER I: Article 15 of the Convention 29 CHAPTER II: Articles 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13 and 14 of the Convention and Article 3 of the First Protocol 120 CHAPTER III: Article 7 of the Convention and Article 1 of the First Protocol 181 CHAPTER IV: Article 3 of the Convention 186 RESOLUTION DH (70) 1 OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE 511 ANNEXES TO CHAPTER IV 519 APPENDICES TO THE REPOR T 673 TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages Introduction V REPORT OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ON THE "GREEK CASE" 1 LIST OF PRINCIPAL DOCUMENTS 3 INTRODUCTION 5 PART A HISTORY OF PROCEEDINGS AND POINTS AT ISSUE CHAPTER I - HISTORY OF PROCEEDINGS 11 1. ADMISSIBILITY STAGE 11 2. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE SUB-COMMISSION 12 3. FURTHER PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION 17 4. OPINION OF MR. DELAHAYE 18 CHAPTER II - POINTS AT ISSUE 19 1. FIRST DECISION ON ADMISSIBILITY 19 2. SECOND DECISION ON ADMISSIBILITY 21 3. POINTS AT ISSUE UNDER THE TWO DECISIONS 24 4. SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE SUB-COMMISSION 25 5. ORDER OF PRESENTATION 26 PART B ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FACTS AND OPINION OF THE COMMISSION CHAPTER I - ARTICLE 15 OF THE CONVENTION 29 A. ISSUES ARISING UNDER ARTICLE 15 29 B. WHETHER A REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT CAN DEROGATE FROM PROVISIONS OF THE CONVENTION UNDER ARTICLE 15 31 I. Submis&ions of the parties 31 1. Respondent Government 31 2. Applicant Governments 31 II. Opinion of the Commission 32 C. WHETHER THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 15, PARAGRAPH (3), HAVE BEEN FULLY MET BY THE RESPONDENT GOVERNMENT 33 I. Requirements of Article 15 (3) 33 II. Communications made by the Government of Greece to the Secre- tary-General under Article 15 33 III. Submissions of the parties 39 IV. Opinion of the Commission 41 TABLE OF CONTENTS IX Pages V. Dissenting opinion of Mr. Delahaye 43 VI. Dissenting opinion of Mr. Fawcett 44 VII. Dissenting opinion of Mr. Eustathiades 44 D. WHETHER THERE WAS, ON 21sT APRIL, 1967 A PUBLIC EMERGENCY IN GREECE THREATENING THE LIFE OF THE NATION 44 I. Introduction 44 II. The Communist danger 45 1. General statements of the parties 45 2. Evidence before the Commission 49 3. Examination of the evidence by the Commission 52 III. The crisis of constitutional government 58 1. General statements of the parties 58 2. Evidence before the Commission 60 3. Examination of the evidence by the Commission 61 IV. The crisis of public order 65 1. General statements of the parties 65 2. Evidence before the Commission 66 3. Examination of the evidence by the Commission 67 V. Opinion of the Commission 71 1. The meaning of the term "public emergency threatening the life of the nation" 71 2. The criteria governing the control of a declaration of public emergency 72 3. As to the situation on 21st April, 1967 73 VI. Dissenting opinion of Mr. Busuttil 76 VII. Dissenting opinion of Mr. Delahaye 76 VIII. Dissenting opinion of Mr. Triantafyllides 80 IX. Dissenting opinion of Mr. Eustathiades 81 X. Dissenting opinion of Mr. Siisterhenn 86 E. THE EVOLUTION OF THE SITUATION FROM 21ST APRIL 1967, TO THE PRESENT TIME 92 I. General statements of the parties 92 II. Evidence before the Commission 93 III. Examination of the evidence by the Commission 94 IV. Opinion of the Commission 100 V. Concurring opinion of Mr. Busuttil 100 VI. Opinion of Mr. Delahaye 101 VII. Opinion of Mr. Eustathiades 102 x TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages VIII. Dissenting opinion of Mr. Ermacora 102 IX. Dissenting opinion of Mr. Siisterhenn 103 F. WHETHER THE MEASURES TAKEN BY THE RESPONDENT GOVERNMENT WERE STRICTLY REQUIRED BY THE EXIGENCIES OF THE SITUATION 103 I. Opinion of the Commission 103 II. Opinion of Mr. Busuttil 104 III. Opinion of Mr. Delahaye 104 IV. Opinion of Mr. Eustathiades 104 V. Opinion of Mr. Siisterhenn 110 G. WHETHER ARTICLES 17 AND 18 OF THE CONVENTION EXCLUDE THE PRESENT DEROGATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 15 OF THE CONVENTION 111 I. Submissions of the parties 111 II. Opinion of the Commission 112 H.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The “Greek Case” in the Council of Europe: a Game Changer for International Law and Human Rights?
    designed by OMBLOS Supported by the Street 30 Panepistimiou University of Athens Alkis Argyriadis Amphitheatre 2019 12–14 December UNDER THE AUSPICES OF H.E. THE PRESIDENT OF THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC MR. PROKOPIOS PAVLOPOULOS International Conference The “Greek Case” in the Council of Europe: A Game Changer for International Law and Human Rights? 12–14 December 2019 Alkis Argyriadis Amphitheatre, University of Athens Supported by the Thursday, 12 December 2019 Friday, 13 December 2019 Saturday, 14 December 2019 (limited seats available due to invited guests) 09:30–10:30 Session 1: The Applicant States, the “Greek 9:00–11:00 Session 4: International Institutions, 16:30 Registration Case”, and Global Anti-Torture Politics Solidarity Movements, and the “Greek Case” 17:00–17:30 Welcome Chair-Discussant: Axel Sotiris Walldén (Free University of Chair-Discussant: Hara Kouki (University of Durham) Willem Ledeboer (Netherlands Institute at Athens) Brussels, former official at the European Commission) Tom Buchanan (University of Oxford) On behalf of the Organizing Committee Hanne Hagtvedt Vik (University of Oslo) & Skage Alexander Amnesty International and the Greek Crisis of 1967–68 H.E. the Ambassador of Sweden, Charlotte Sammelin Østberg (University of Oslo) Kim Christiaens (University of Leuven): International Solidarity Global Anti-Torture Politics 1967–77 and the Scandinavian States with Greece in International Perspective H.E. the Ambassador of Denmark, Klavs A. Holm Wiebe Hommes (Amsterdam Centre for European Law and Janis Nalbadidacis (Humboldt University, Berlin) The “Greek Case” from Inside H.E. the Ambassador of the Netherlands, Stella Ronner-Grubacic Governance) č ć The Greek Case & the Netherlands: a Watershed Moment Konstantina Maragkou (London School of Economics) H.E.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Commission of Human Rights: an Analysis and Appraisal, 3 Brook
    Brooklyn Journal of International Law Volume 3 | Issue 2 Article 3 1977 The urE opean Commission of Human Rights: An Analysis and Appraisal John T. White Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjil Recommended Citation John T. White, The European Commission of Human Rights: An Analysis and Appraisal, 3 Brook. J. Int'l L. (1977). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjil/vol3/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Brooklyn Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS: AN ANALYSIS AND APPRAISAL John T. Wright* INTRODUCTION During the past thirty years, the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms has been the focus of a number of instruments promulgated by the community of nations. The Uni- versal Declaration of Human Rights,1 the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,2 and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights3 form the basis of efforts by the United Nations to secure the observance of human rights among member States. In addition to these universal documents, the countries of Europe have drawn upon their common heritage to promote the realization of human rights through the ratifica- tion of the European Convention on Human Rights and Funda- mental Freedoms.' The Convention creates a Commission of Human Rights, as well as a European Court of Human Rights. This article will explore the workings of the Commission, the more active of the two bodies, and will analyze its effectiveness in establishing a standard for the observance of human rights in light of the differing political systems of the European States.
    [Show full text]
  • International Conference the 'Greek Case' in the Council of Europe: A
    International Conference The ‘Greek Case’ in the Council of Europe: A Game Changer for International Law and Human Rights? Athens, 12–14 December 2019 This year marks the 50th anniversary of Greece’s withdrawal from the Council of Europe, following pressure by European countries and institutions for the violation of human rights by the military junta in Greece (1967–74). The Athens-based Netherlands Institute and the Danish Institute, in collaboration with the Marangopoulos Foundation for Human Rights, the Swedish Institute and the Norwegian Institute are organizing an international conference on the history and legacy of this emblematic case. The conference is supported by the Carlsberg Foundation. In 1967 Denmark, Norway, and Sweden – later joined by the Netherlands – used the European Commission on Human Rights (ECHR) system against the Greek Colonels. On 12 December 1969 Greece withdrew from the CoE to avoid expulsion. The reports of the ECHR constituted a paradigmatic condemnation of the regime by an international body. In light of the growing debates about the usefulness and impact of international pressure on authoritarian states for democratization and the rule of law, the so-called ‘Greek case’ emerges as an important moment in the history of international law, human rights, and transnational justice. The case marked the first time a member of the CoE risked expulsion because of human rights violations. Thus it became one of the pioneer inter- state cases over fundamental rights in European human rights law, generating important discussions about the Junta’s brutal regime in other European parliaments. The ‘Greek case’ was also exceptional in that there were no apparent national interests (at least at first sight) on behalf of the plaintiff countries.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cultural Cold War and the New Women of Power. Making a Case Based on the Fulbright and Ford Foundations in Greece
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Publications and Research New York City College of Technology 2018 The Cultural Cold War and the New Women of Power. Making a Case based on the Fulbright and Ford Foundations in Greece Despina Lalaki CUNY New York City College of Technology How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/ny_pubs/486 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] The Cultural Cold War and the New Women of Power. Making a Case based on the Fulbright and Ford Foundations in Greece Despina Lalaki The Author / L’auteur Despina Lalaki is a historical sociologist and she teaches at the City University of New York, CUNY. She has published in peer-reviewed journals including The Journal of Historical Sociology and Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies and various media such as Al Jazeera, Boston Occupier, New Politics Magazine and Marginalia – Σημειώσεις στο Περιθώριο. Abstract When in the 1950s C. Wright Mills was writing about the emergence of the new power elites he paid no attention to the presence of women in its midsts. He was not entirely mistaken. Yet there is a particular intertwining of the ideologies of leadership and masculinity which serves to maintain the status quo, the privilege of an elite and perpetuate preconceptions about political agency and gender. In an attempt to go beyond available models and predominantly masculine images of the postwar America the present article accounts for women’s role in the postwar American efforts for cultural hegemony.
    [Show full text]
  • The Backsliding of Democracy in Today's Greece
    STUDY The Backsliding of Democracy DIMITRI A. SOTIROPOULOS DECEMBER 2018 n Democracy in Greece has survived the economic crisis, but democracy’s long- term problems have been accentuated during the crisis. Democracy has started backsliding. n The backsliding of democracy is related not only to the gravity of the recent crisis, but also to long-term, historical legacies, such as political clientelism, populism and corruption. n Political clientelism has thrived, as discriminatory access to state resources was offered to favoured individuals and particular social groups even under the crisis. n Populism has attracted the support of popular strata but has failed to deliver on its promises, contributing thus to disaffection with democracy. n Corruption has undermined transparency and accountability, negatively affecting the rule of law. n Long-term reforms are required, in order for a reversal of democracy’s backsliding to be achieved and a new political and economic crisis to be averted. SOTIROPOULOS | THE BACKSLIDING OF DEMOCRACY IN TODAY’S GREECE Table of Contents 1. Introduction..............................................................................................................7 2. Democracy and Democratization Today..................................................................8 3. The Relative Backsliding of Democracy in Greece..................................................9 4. Political clientelism and democracy in today’s Greece.........................................11 4.1 Clientelism as political participation.................................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • Margarita Kondopoulou the Greek Media and the Kosovo Crisis
    conflict & communication online, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2002 www.cco.regener-online.de ISSN 1618-0747 Margarita Kondopoulou The Greek media and the Kosovo crisis Kurzfassung: Die NATO-Luftangriffe (24/3/99-10/6/99), welche ein Ende der Misshandlung der albanischen Bevölkerung durch die Serben erzwingen sollten, wurden von einem Großteil der internationalen Staatengemeinschaft unterstützt. In Griechenland jedoch wurden sie ganz anders wahrgenommen. Eine Schlüsselposition für die stark ablehnende Haltung Griechenlands nahmen die griechischen Medien ein. Ihrer Auffassung nach bestand der wahre Grund für die NATO-Offensive in einer Änderung der geopolitischen Landkarte zum Vorteil des Westens, insbesondere der USA. Der vorliegende Aufsatz geht davon aus, dass sowohl die griechischen als auch die internationalen Medien ihre eigenen (nationalen) Kontexte auf die Kosovo-Krise projizierten. Das besondere Interesse an der Untersuchung der griechischen Medien hat drei gute Gründe: 1. Eine eigenständige Perspektive unterschied die Medienberichterstattung in Griechenland – einem NATO-Mitglied – deutlich vom vorherrschenden Medienkonsens in der westlichen Welt. 2. Die Medienberichterstattung stand in deutlichem Gegensatz zur offiziellen Regierungspolitik, die zwar eine diplomatische Lösung der Krise gefordert hatte, letztlich aber doch die Entscheidung ihrer NATO-Partner unterstützen musste, Serbien zu bombardieren. 3. Das Abweichen der griechischen Medien vom Mainstream der NATO-freundlichen Berichterstattung hat in vielen anderen Ländern ein negatives Bild Griechenlands und seiner Medien entstehen lassen. Eine Untersuchung der Medieninhalte zeigt, dass die griechischen Medien trotz aller Unterschiede in der politischen Ausrichtung und ungeachtet der Unterschiede in der Paraphrasierung der Anti-NATO-Argumente eine einheitliche Oppositionshaltung einnahmen. Zwar richteten sie ihre Aufmerksamkeit mehr oder weniger auf dieselben Themengebiete wie die Medien in der übrigen Welt, verkehrten jedoch die Argumentationsrichtung in ihr Gegenteil (so wurde z.B.
    [Show full text]
  • The Southern Flank of NATO, 1951-1959: Military Stategy Or Poltical Stabilisation? Chourchoulis, Dionysios
    The southern flank of NATO, 1951-1959: military stategy or poltical stabilisation? Chourchoulis, Dionysios The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author For additional information about this publication click this link. https://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/jspui/handle/123456789/702 Information about this research object was correct at the time of download; we occasionally make corrections to records, please therefore check the published record when citing. For more information contact [email protected] 1 THE SOUTHERN FLANK OF NATO, 1951-1959. MILITARY STRATEGY OR POLITICAL STABILISATION? Dionysios Chourchoulis Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Queen Mary University of London Department of History September 2010 2 ABSTRACT In 1951-52, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation established the Southern Flank, a strategy for the defence of the eastern Mediterranean in the Cold War involving Greece, Italy and Turkey. Among its many aims, the Southern Flank sought to mobilize Greece and Turkey as allies and integrate them into the Western defence system. Throughout 1950s, the alliance developed the Southern Flank and in 1959, it was finally stabilized as fractious Greek-Turkish relations were improved by the temporary settlement over Cyprus. These events are the focus of this thesis. It examines, among other things, the initial negotiations of 1951-52, the Southern Flank‟s structure and function and relative value in NATO‟s overall policy, and its response to the challenges of the eastern Mediterranean in the early Cold War.
    [Show full text]
  • The Colonels' Dictatorship and Its Afterlives
    This is a postprint version of the following published document: Antoniou, D., Kornetis, K., Sichani, A.M. and Stefatos, K. (2017). Introduction: The Colonels' Dictatorship and Its Afterlives. Journal of Modern Greek Studies, 35(2) pp. 281-306. DOI: 10.1353/mgs.2017.0021 © 2017 by The Modern Greek Studies Association Introduction: The Colonels’ Dictatorship and Its Afterlives Dimitris Antoniou, Kostis Kornetis, Anna-Maria Sichani, and Katerina Stefatos A half century after the coup d’état of 21 April 1967, the art exhibition docu- menta 14 launched its public programs in Athens by revisiting the Colonels’ dictatorship. The organizers chose the former headquarters of the infamous military police (EAT/ESA) to host the “exercises of freedom,”1 a series of walk- ing tours, lectures, screenings, and performances that examined resistance, torture, trauma, and displacement in a comparative perspective. The initia- tive was met with mixed feelings, and its public discussion raised import- ant questions about the past. Why is it urgent today to revisit the junta as a period of acute trauma? Can we trace the roots of Greece’s current predicament to its non-democratic past? What remains unsaid and unsayable about the dictatorship and its enduring legacies?2 While the junta has been a favorite subject for public history (broadly understood here to include literature, film, personal testimonies, and so on), research on it has remained on the margins. Initially, it was marked by sporadic attempts to respond to the pressing public interest to understand the dictator- ship as a contemporary phenomenon (Tsoucalas 1969; Clogg and Yannopoulos 1972; Poulantzas 1976; Mouzelis 1978) and, most importantly, to explain how the Colonels came to power and why they managed to govern Greece for seven years.
    [Show full text]
  • Derogation of Human Rights in Situations of Public Emergency: the Experience of the European Convention on Human Rights
    Derogation of Human Rights in Situations of Public Emergency: The Experience of the European Convention on Human Rights Christoph Schreuert I. Introduction Governments commonly assert that there exists a right to derogate from human rights norms to safeguard the public interest during crises. Such assertions reflect an attempt to reconcile individual and aggregate interests.' This task becomes especially difficult in situations of public emergency.2 Crisis or emergency situations usually involve violence and the imminent or actual breakdown of minimum order. In such situations, insistence on special individual interests can have serious detrimental effects on community welfare. The need to accommodate both sets of claims is recognized in international documents dealing with the protection of human rights as well as in national instruments safeguarding basic rights and fundamental freedoms.3 While it is clear that individual rights are not absolute, the international community must guard against spurious invocations of community interests to ex- cuse violations of human rights. Such invocations are typically made to facilitate the task of power elites in ruling a community or, worse, to 4 further their special interests. International documents for the protection of human rights use sev- eral techniques to reconcile individual rights with community inter- ests.5 One such technique is an "accommodation clause" which t Professor of International law, University of Salzburg, Austria. 1. See M. McDOUGAL, H. LASSWELL & L. CHEN, HUMAN RIGHTS AND WORLD PUBLIC ORDER 413-15 (1980). 2. 1d. at 158-59. 3. See the respective provisions in the constitutions of the following countries: Finland, art. 16 (1919); France, art.
    [Show full text]
  • Max Van Der Stoel — a Tireless Defender of Greek Democracy
    Max van der Stoel — a tireless defender of Greek democracy Peter Leuprecht 1 Many have paid tribute to Max van der Stoel’s personality, life and achievements, and rightly so. One facet was not, or not sufficiently, referred to in the numerous obituaries: his leading role in Europe’s fight against the military dictatorship in Greece. It is in this context that I had the privilege of getting to know him and working with him. Back in the 1960s, Max van der Stoel was a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. He was appointed Rapporteur for what was to become the ‘Greek case’ of which I was in charge in the Secretariat of the Assembly. When a military junta overthrew the democratic regime in Greece in April 1967, Europe was shocked and stunned. For the first time since the foundation of the Council of Europe in 1949, the solidity of the ‘collective guarantee’ of pluralistic democracy, the rule of law and human rights for which it had been set up was to be put to the test. Max van der Stoel was fully aware of the profound significance of the ‘Greek case’ for Europe and the Council of Europe, often referred to as its ‘democratic conscience’. He took his task of Rapporteur very seriously. We worked closely together and I accompanied him on all his missions, mostly to Greece until the regime declared both of us persona non grata. The new military rulers of Greece claimed that they had seized power to prevent a communist takeover, an assertion that was never supported by evidence.
    [Show full text]
  • ECHR and States of Emergency: Article 15-A Domestic Power of Derogation from Human Rights Obligations
    The ECHR and States of Emergency: Article 15-A Domestic Power of Derogation from Human Rights Obligations MOHAMED M. EL ZEIDY* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRO DUCTION ................................................................................................... 278 II. SECTIO N O NE ..................................................................................................... 280 A. Problems of Definition Under Article 15 .................................................. 280 III. PRECONDITIONS FOR A VALID DEROGATION ....................................................... 282 A. "PublicEmergency Threatening the Life of the Nation" ................... 283 B. "Strictly Required by the Exigencies of the Situation ............................. 286 1. The Doctrine of State Necessity ......................................................... 286 2. The Principleof Proportionality....................................................... 288 3. The Contents of the Notice of Derogation......................................... 289 * Prosecutor at the Office of the Attorney General of the Arab Republic of Egypt, Ministry of Justice (1997-present); First Lieutenant, Special Guarding Unit, Ministry of Interior Affairs (1995-97); First Lieutenant, Special Forces Anti-Terrorism Unit, Ministry of Interior Affairs (1993-95). Ph.D. candidate, National University of Ireland, Galway; LL.M. (International Human Rights) 2001, National University of Ireland, Galway; LL.M. (Public Law) 1999, Cairo University; LL.B., B.S. (Police Sciences) 1993, Police Academy,
    [Show full text]
  • Doctrine of Margin of Appreciation and the European Convention on Human Rights Cora S
    Notre Dame Law Review Volume 53 | Issue 1 Article 6 10-1-1977 Doctrine of Margin of Appreciation and the European Convention on Human Rights Cora S. Feingold Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Cora S. Feingold, Doctrine of Margin of Appreciation and the European Convention on Human Rights, 53 Notre Dame L. Rev. 90 (1977). Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr/vol53/iss1/6 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOTES THE DOCTRINE OF MARGIN OF APPRECIATION AND THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS* I. Introduction The European Convention on Human Rights1 is an agreement designed to secure international recognition and observance of those human rights con- sidered necessary in a democratic society. The Convention is the first inter- national agreement to integrate a concern for the protection of human rights with an enforcement procedure to ensure that Member States comply with their obligation to uphold those rights. The Convention's enforcement apparatus consists of two organs: the European Commission of Human Rights2 and the European Court of Human Rights.' The Commission, a quasi-judicial body, serves a dual function. First, the Commission determines whether an application alleging a breach of the Conven- tion is admissible for consideration on its merits. The criterion used by the Com- mission in determining admissibility is whether there is some indication of a breach of the Convention.
    [Show full text]