Nov 18, 2014 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
On 17 November 2014, the ICJ and ILGA-Europe filed their joint written submissions with the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Milica Đorđević and others v. Serbia (Application Nos. 5591/10, 17802/12, 23138/13 and 25474/14).
The case concerns the authorities’ decision in 2009 to relocate the applicants’ “Pride Parade” to promote the equality and visibility of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people away from central Belgrade, Serbia, and the authorities’ repeated banning of Pride Parades in central Belgrade in 2011, 2012 and 2013.
The ICJ and the European Region of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA-Europe)’s submissions to the Court focus on:
- the essential role of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly in a democratic society, and the scope of discretion afforded to States in determining measures required to prevent disorder at an assembly where counter-demonstrators threaten violence against groups most at risk; and
- the nature and scope of the State’s obligation in relation to the right to freedom of peaceful assembly under the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, focusing in particular on States’ duty to adopt legislative and administrative measures in order to fulfil their legal obligations.
SERBIA-ECHR amicus Dordevic-Advocacy-Legal Submission-2014-ENG (full text in PDF)
Oct 10, 2014 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
Today, the AIRE Centre (Advice on Individual Rights in Europe), the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and the ICJ presented joint written observations to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of F.G. v. Sweden (Application No. 43611/11).
The case arises from the Swedish authorities’ dismissal of an asylum application. The submissions focus on:
- the obligation for Parties to the ECHR to ensure that the risk upon removal is addressed in such a way as to guarantee that the Convention’s protection is practical and effective;
- whether requiring coerced, self-enforced suppression of a fundamental aspect of one’s identity, which enforced concealment of one’s religion entails, is compatible with Convention obligations;
- the relevance and significance of the EU asylum acquis and Court of Justice of the EU’s jurisprudence on these matters; and
- the relevance and significance of the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention.
SWEDEN-ECHR amicus FG vs Sweden-Advocacy-Legal Submission-2014-ENG (full text in PDF)
Jun 26, 2014 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions, News
The ICJ expresses its disappointment today at the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of M.E. v. Sweden (Application No. 71398/12).
May 14, 2014 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
The European Court of Human Rights granted permission to the AIRE Centre, ILGA-Europe and the ICJ for a third-party intervention in the case of Pavla Sabalić v. Croatia (Application No. 50231/13).
Oct 21, 2013 | News
The ICJ welcomes today’s ruling by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Inés Del Rio Prada, affirming that changes made retroactively to the remission of her sentence violated her rights.
The ICJ, which intervened as third-party in the case, says the judgment reinforces and makes effective the principle of non-retroactivity of criminal law, an essential element of the rule of law.
“This is a highly significant judgment that affirms and strengthens the rule of law in criminal sentencing,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe Programme. “Rules and practices that have a significant impact on the calculation and remission of sentences must not be applied retroactively to the detriment of a convicted person.”
“The key principle that the Grand Chamber has upheld today is that the rules that apply to the calculation of the sentence to be served, must be clear and foreseeable under the law at the time of conviction. Subsequent re-interpretation by the courts cannot fundamentally revise the principles that apply to a sentence already handed down. While States have the responsibility for setting sentencing rules for crimes, any changes to those rules which would result in an increased penalty must not applied retroactively in breach of (Article 7 of) the European Convention on Human Rights,” she added.
BACKGROUND:
Inés Del Rio Prada had been convicted of terrorism offences and sentenced to a total of over 3,000 years of imprisonment.
According to Spanish sentencing rules in force at the time, this theoretical sentence was tantamount to an effective sentence of 30 years imprisonment.
While at that time, the benefit of sentence reduction for work performed in prison was applied to the 30-year period, in 2008 the Spanish courts decided to deduct such benefits from the 3,000 years of nominal imprisonment instead, thereby significantly reducing their impact, and leading to a considerably longer sentence in the case of the applicant.
In its judgment, the Grand Chamber held that the application of changes to Spanish sentencing rules as applied to applicant Inés Del Rio Prada had violated the prohibition on retroactive penalties guaranteed in Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
It held that a 2006 decision of the Spanish Supreme Court, which altered the system of calculation of maximum terms of sentences, leading to reduced remission of sentences for work done in prison, constituted a retroactive redefinition of the sentence previously imposed, which could not have been foreseen.
As such, the Court held that Spain had violated its obligations under article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The Court also found that the applicant’s continued detention violated the right to liberty under Article 5(1) ECHR, and required her release at the earliest possible date.
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, ICJ Europe Programme, t +32 2 734 8446; e-mail : roísín.pillay(a)icj.org
Read also:
Third Party Intervention in Del Rio Prada v. Spain
