Council of Europe and UK play political ping pong over human rights

Council of Europe and UK play political ping pong over human rights

Committee of Ministers publishes decisions on the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

Strasbourg, 10.03.2010 – The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe concluded on 4 March 2010 its first special human rights meeting devoted to the supervision of the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. The decisions adopted directly at the meeting in some 25 cases or groups of cases against Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Italy, Moldova, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Turkey, Ukraine and United Kingdom have just been published.

1078th DH meeting –4 March 2010

Section 4.3

- 1 case against the United Kingdom

74025/01 Hirst No. 2, judgment of 06/10/2005 - Grand Chamber

Interim Resolution CM/ResDH(2009)160

Decisions

The Deputies,

1. recalled that in the present judgment, delivered on 6 October 2005, the Court found that the general, automatic and indiscriminate restriction on the right of convicted prisoners in custody to vote, fell outside any acceptable margin of appreciation and was incompatible with Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention;

2. recalled further that at the last DH meeting in December 2009, the Committee of Ministers adopted Interim Resolution CM/ResDH(2009)160, in which it expressed serious concern that the substantial delay in implementing the judgment has given rise to a significant risk that the next United Kingdom general election, which must take place by June 2010, will be performed in a way that fails to comply with the Convention, and urged the respondent state to rapidly adopt measures to implement the judgment;

3. noted that notwithstanding the Grand Chamber’s judgment in 2005, a declaration of incompatibility with the Convention under the Human Rights Act 1998 by the highest civil appeal court in Scotland1 and the large number of persons affected, the said automatic and indiscriminate restriction remains in force;

4. reiterated their serious concern that a failure to implement the Court’s judgment before the general election and the increasing number of persons potentially affected by the restriction could result in similar violations affecting a significant category of persons, giving rise to a substantial risk of repetitive applications to the European Court;

5. strongly urged the authorities to rapidly adopt measures, of even an interim nature, to ensure the execution of the Court’s judgment before the forthcoming general election;

6. decided to resume consideration of this item at their 1086th meeting (June 2010) (DH) in the light of further information to be provided by the authorities on general measures.

* * *

Link. Scroll down to near the bottom of the page.