A Single European Court of Human Rights
| Author | C. Flinterman |
| Published date | 01 June 1994 |
| Date | 01 June 1994 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X9400100201 |
| Subject Matter | Editorial |
Editorial
A Single European Court of Human Rights
The European Court of Human Rights is rightly seen by many as a sort of constitutional
court. This image may be strengthened by the recent adoption by the Committee of
Ministers of the Council
of
Europe, on April 20 1994, of Protocol No. 11 to the
Convention for the Protection
of
Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,
Restructuring the Control Mechanism Established thereby. This Protocol provides for
the establishment of a single European Court of Human Rights (hereafter single Court)
and ends in that way a decade of intensive diplomatic negotiations on the restructuring
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereafter the European Convention).
The idea of a single Court is not new. It was submitted to the Congress of Europe
convened by the International Committee of Movements for European Unity, and held
at The Hague from 8 to 10May 1948. The time then, however, was not ripe to accept
such a revolutionary idea.
It
was feared that such a Court would be inundated with
frivolous complaints and would be used for political ends, thereby undermining its
authority.
For
that reason the by now well-known tripartite system was established in
which the European Commission of Human Rights (hereafter the Commission) would
filter out inadmissible complaints and in which the Commission would either authorize
individuals to initiate proceedings before the Court or would refer the case to the
Committee of Ministers for a final and binding decision.
For various reasons the idea of a single Court re-emerged during the eighties: the huge
increase in the number of petitions submitted to the Commission which led to an
enormous backlog; the equally rapidly growing number of cases referred by the
Commission to the Court; the excessive length of the procedure before the Commission
and the Court; and the evolving dissatisfaction with the role of the Committee of
Ministers as a political organ in an essentially judicial procedure. Another important
factor in recent years has been the admission of Central and Eastern European states to
the Council of Europe after the break-up of the Soviet empire; these states invariably
also acceded to the European Convention with the unavoidable implication that more
and more applicants would find their way to Strasbourg.
MJ 1 (1994) 119
To continue reading
Request your trial