UPSC MainsLAW-PAPER-I201325 Marks
हिंदी में पढ़ें
Q21.

EU Coup & European Court of Human Rights

A member of European Union has witnessed widespread disturbances, consequent upon a military coup, including censorship on all forms of media and communication, targeting civilians sympathetic with the ousted leader by assaulting and killing, severe rationing and control on essential commodities such as fuel and food resulting into galloping inflation. In the light of these grave violations of human rights, examine the role of : European Court of Human Rights.

How to Approach

This question demands a nuanced understanding of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and its role in upholding human rights. The approach should be to first contextualize the scenario, then detail the ECtHR's mandate, jurisdiction, and enforcement mechanisms. Subsequently, analyze how the ECtHR could respond to the described situation, considering limitations and potential challenges. Finally, discuss the broader implications for international law and the EU’s commitment to human rights. A table comparing the ECtHR's powers with other international bodies will be helpful.

Model Answer

0 min read

Introduction

The scenario presented, depicting a member state of the European Union experiencing a military coup and subsequent human rights violations, highlights a critical juncture for international law and regional governance. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), established under the European Convention on Human Rights (1950), serves as a cornerstone of the European human rights protection system. It aims to ensure that states parties respect the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention. The recent events in Myanmar, where a military coup led to widespread human rights abuses, underscore the fragility of democratic institutions and the urgent need for effective international mechanisms to safeguard fundamental rights. This response will examine the potential role of the ECtHR in addressing such a crisis.

Understanding the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

The ECtHR is an international court based in Strasbourg, France. It is not part of the European Union, but it is an integral part of the Council of Europe. Its primary function is to rule on applications brought against states parties to the European Convention on Human Rights.

Mandate and Jurisdiction

  • Convention Rights: The ECtHR ensures that state parties respect the rights enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights, which includes civil and political rights such as freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and the right to a fair trial.
  • Jurisdiction: The Court has jurisdiction over applications from individuals, a group of individuals, or states parties who allege violations of the Convention. A state must be a party to both the Convention and the Court’s jurisdiction.
  • Admissibility Criteria: Applications must be exhausted all domestic remedies (national courts) before being brought before the ECtHR. They must also be within the Court’s six-month time limit from the final domestic decision and fall within its subject matter jurisdiction.

Potential Role of the ECtHR in the Scenario

Given the described situation – military coup, censorship, violence against civilians, rationing, and inflation – the ECtHR could play several roles, though its effectiveness is constrained by specific legal and political realities.

  • Receiving and Adjudicating Applications: Individuals and organizations within the affected EU member state, or even from other member states concerned about the situation, could lodge applications with the ECtHR alleging violations of the Convention rights.
  • Interim Measures (Rule 39): Under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, the ECtHR can order interim measures if it considers there is an urgent need to prevent an irreparable harm to a party. This could involve halting specific actions by the authorities, such as preventing arbitrary arrests or curtailing censorship. This is a crucial tool for immediate protection.
  • Judgements and Recommendations: If the Court finds violations, it can issue judgements requiring the state to provide redress to the victims, including compensation and measures to prevent similar violations in the future. It can also make recommendations to the government.
  • Monitoring Compliance: The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe oversees the execution of the ECtHR’s judgements. This body can exert political pressure on the state to comply with the Court’s rulings.

Limitations and Challenges

While the ECtHR possesses significant authority, several limitations could hinder its effectiveness in the described scenario:

  • State Consent: The ECtHR’s jurisdiction depends on the state’s consent to be subject to its rulings. If the military regime refuses to recognize the Court’s authority, enforcement becomes significantly difficult.
  • Political Will: The Committee of Ministers’ ability to enforce judgements relies on the political will of member states. A lack of consensus or political pressure could lead to non-compliance.
  • Practical Enforcement: Even with judgements and recommendations, enforcing them within a state controlled by a military regime presents practical challenges.
  • Rule of Law Erosion: A coup regime often disregards the rule of law, making it difficult to access the courts and gather evidence.

Comparison with Other International Bodies

Body Mandate Jurisdiction Enforcement
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) Uphold European Convention on Human Rights States parties to the Convention & Court’s jurisdiction Judgements, interim measures, Committee of Ministers oversight
International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression States parties to the Rome Statute Arrest warrants, trials, sentences
United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) Promote and protect human rights globally All UN member states Resolutions, Universal Periodic Review, Special Procedures

Case Study: Greece and the Asylum Seeker Crisis (2011-Present)

The ECtHR has been involved in several cases concerning asylum seekers and refugees in Greece, highlighting the Court’s role in protecting vulnerable populations. In the case of NP and NT v. Greece (2016), the Court found that Greece had failed to adequately assess the asylum claims of two Syrian refugees, violating Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) and Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the Convention. This case underscored the Court's ability to scrutinize states' asylum policies and ensure compliance with human rights standards, even during times of crisis. This example shows how the ECtHR can hold states accountable for their treatment of vulnerable populations.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the European Court of Human Rights possesses vital mechanisms to address human rights violations within its jurisdiction. However, the effectiveness of the ECtHR is significantly constrained by the need for state consent, political will, and practical enforcement challenges, particularly in situations involving military coups and the erosion of the rule of law. While interim measures under Rule 39 can provide immediate relief, long-term solutions require sustained commitment from member states and a robust international framework for upholding human rights. The recent scenario underscores the ongoing need for strengthening the ECtHR's capacity and ensuring its continued relevance in safeguarding fundamental freedoms across Europe.

Answer Length

This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.

Additional Resources

Key Definitions

Rule 39
Rule 39 of the Rules of Court allows the European Court of Human Rights to order interim measures to prevent imminent irreparable harm to an individual or group.
Res Judicata
A legal doctrine meaning "a matter already judged," preventing the same issue from being re-litigated. Applicants to the ECtHR must have exhausted all domestic remedies (res judicata) before bringing a case.

Key Statistics

As of 2023, the ECtHR had a backlog of over 40,000 pending cases, demonstrating the strain on the Court's resources and the challenges in timely addressing human rights violations. (Source: Council of Europe website)

The average length of time for a case to be processed by the ECtHR is approximately 4-6 years. (Source: ECtHR Annual Report 2022)

Examples

Myanmar Coup and International Response

The 2021 military coup in Myanmar, and the subsequent crackdown on dissent and human rights defenders, illustrates the challenges faced by international bodies, including the ECtHR (though Myanmar is not a party), in responding to severe human rights crises. The UN Human Rights Council has condemned the coup and called for accountability.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can the ECtHR directly enforce its judgements?

No, the ECtHR cannot directly enforce its judgements. Enforcement relies on the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which monitors compliance and can exert political pressure on states.

Topics Covered

International RelationsLawHuman RightsEuropean CourtInternational Justice