Topic for a debate
To a University looking for topics to discuss about Europe, I have suggested this one:
Reform of the Human Rights European Court (HREC)
HREC has been created after WW II as a tool to prevent in the future new European conflicts by insuring Member States’compliance with the European Convention, i.e. checking that none may become arbitrary as the two dictatorships which were involved in WW II.
The HREC has been transformed as a super-court of law offering compensation to individuals allegedly victims of Human Rights violations. The purpose has changed, which is rightly approved in an over-all European point of view. In effect, HREC is, or should be, a key factor of European legitimacy.
But as a consequence of the change, HREC functioning has been impaired to the point that it does not satisfy either one of its two purposes, the former and the present. Critics, right or wrong, focus on inefficiency and lack of impartiality.
I am aware that such a new topic may « rock the boat » but I feel there is a development of Human Rights Defenders’ pugnacity about institutions which may not satisfy their purposes.
Christian Lesecq
Docteur en Droit
http://justeurope.unblog.fr
The British influential think tank Policy Exchange called on February 7, 2011 for the UK to open negotiations about HREC. The Government should consider withdrawing Britain from HREC unless it can significantly reform within two years. Failure to achieve substantial progress within two years should lead Britain to pull out and allow the Supreme Court to adjudicate on human rights cases.
The call comes as the Government is wrestling with a ruling from HREC that prisoners must be granted the vote.
The foreword to the report states that « International institutions which are set up by everyone become in practice answerable to no one, and courts have an age-old tendency to try to enlarge their jurisdiction such as HREC to micromanage the legal systems of Council of Europe Member States.
Commentaire by justeurope — 21 février, 2011 @ 16:15