Optimism in Strasbourg that worthwhile reforms to the court can be achieved following Cameron's speech
Joshua Rozenberg
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 26 January 2012 17.26 GMT
The process of reforming the human rights court that began at Interlaken in 2010 and continued at Izmir in 2011 will not be completed this year at Ipswich or Inverness. Instead, Brighton has been chosen by the UK, which currently chairs the Council of Europe, as the venue for a ministerial conference at which member states will approve reforms to the council's most important institution.
That, at least, is the plan. British diplomats are currently sounding out the other 46 member states in the Council of Europe and will table proposals by the end of next month. These will be discussed by governments during March with the hope of producing a declaration that can be approved at the Brighton meeting, which runs from April 18 to 20. Any decisions will then need the support of the committee of ministers, which holds its final meeting under the UK's chairmanship in mid-May.
And what will those proposals be? We can get some idea of these from a confidential discussion document, known as a "non-paper", reported by Nicholas Watt and by me on Thursday for the Guardian.
In essence, they boil down to giving the human rights court more control over its own workload. What they do not do, according to British officials, is to give member states any sort of opt-out from the court's jurisdiction - the so-called "democratic override" that some pressure groups have been hoping for. That would have run into the obvious objection that it would have been used the most by states with the worst record on human rights.
British officials well understand that the court would never give its support to anything that diluted its powers. This was confirmed by Sir Nicolas Bratza, president of the human rights court.
"We must continue to ensure that the court remains strong, independent and courageous in its defence of the European convention on human rights," the British judge told reporters on Thursday.
Asked about David Cameron's speech in Strasbourg a day earlier, Bratza described it as "very measured" and there was much in it to which the court could subscribe. The court agreed that there was room for improvement in its procedures and much was being done to speed up cases using new single-judge procedures.
What Bratza did not accept was the prime minister's suggestions that the Strasbourg judges were acting as a "court of fourth instance", giving litigants yet another bite at the cherry, or that the court was acting as if it was an immigration tribunal or a small claims court.
"Nor is it true that we are ready to substitute our own judgment for that of the national courts," the president insisted.
The mood in Strasbourg is one of optimism. Insiders believe that under the UK chairmanship it will be possible to achieve worthwhile reforms to the court. Cameron's speech has not been seen as that of a prime minister who is trying to attack or undermine the court, despite the political briefing that preceded it.
There is even a feeling that Britain might be willing to make some minor concession on votes for prisoners, though the government will probably not have to do anything until 2013.
The issue is currently back before the court and a further ruling is expected towards the end of this year. Though it seems unlikely that the court will reverse its earlier ruling that a blanket ban on votes by prisoners is a breach of their human rights, reconsideration of the issue at least gives the UK a breathing space.
Meanwhile, the court is waiting to see what proposals Britain is tabling for its all-important ministerial conference. If they find favour, perhaps the Brighton Declaration will be seen as more of a milestone than a millstone.
Comment:
I am not interested in minor concessions for a major breach of human rights! And, 2013 is too long to wait for a Court decision in 2005!
No comments:
Post a Comment