Episode 24: Vainly knocking on the shut doors of Strasbourg
When a door is firmly shut, getting it to open can be very difficult. This image is useful to understand the effect of a finding by the European Court of Human Rights that a provision of the European Convention on Human Rights is either not applicable or not violated.
[podcast]https://blogs.brighton.ac.uk/humanrights/files/2015/07/hrm24_shutting_the_strasbourg_doors-1vsigvm.mp3[/podcast]
(If you have problems with the embedded player use this link to listen).
Strasbourg negative rulings are often categorical. They tend to get repeated from one case to the next, in a fairly automatic manner. They result in applicants being summarily rejected when they come knocking on the Strasbourg doors.
A violation verdict is less categorical. It effects an opening – but how wide this opening is typically needs to be tested over time.
Maaouia is an example of shut doors that was examined in the last episode. In this episode, I discuss other examples: Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali (no right to family reunion), N. v. UK (return to an early death), and Saadi v. UK (immigration detention for administrative convenience).
To download a copy of this podcast right-click this link and choose ‘Download Linked File’ or ‘Save Link As…’.
Please note that the podcast will take a short break over the summer and return for the final six episodes in September.