Persons Category

Disciplinary sanction of non-promotion of a judge for harsh articles against the President of the Supreme Court. Accusations without proof. No violation of the right to freedom of expression

Article 10
08/12/2020 19:05

JUDGMENT
Panioglu v. Romania 08.12.2020 (app. no. 33794/14)
Judges and freedom of expression. Official sanctions against a judge, in particular concerning promotion, due to an article she had written in the press.
The applicant wrote an article in the press entitled “Nothing about how a Comrade Prosecutor has become president of all the judges”. In it she harshly criticized the activities of the President of the Court of Cassation during the period of the oppressive communist regime, whenever she worked as a Prosecutor. She wondered how the “Comrade Prosecutor” had acted to “uproot the enemies of the socialist class” and to “chase” women who had had an abortion. . She spoke of the “dungeons” and “poverty” under the regime and the prosecutors “somewhere above in an untouchable shining world … All these
comrades, usurpers of Christ and His Law, sternly guard[ing] the communist prison”. She spoke about living in grinding poverty while “the Comrade Prosecutor ha[d] also floated above”.

Participation of a judge illegally appointed by the Minister of Justice in an appellate court. Violation of the right of access to a court established by law

Article 6 - Par. 1
07/12/2020 12:08

GRAND CHAMBER JUDGMENT
Guðmundur Andri Ástráðsson v. Iceland 01.12.2020 (app. no. 26374/18)
The case concerned the applicant’s allegation that the new Icelandic Court of Appeal (Landsréttur)
which had upheld his conviction for road traffic offences was not “a tribunal established by law”, on
account of irregularities in the appointment of one of the judges who heard his case.
Given the potential implications of finding a violation and the important interests at stake, the Court
took the view that the right to a “tribunal established by law” should not be construed too broadly
such that any irregularity in a judicial appointment procedure would risk compromising that right.
It thus formulated a three-step test to determine whether irregularities in a judicial appointment
procedure were of such gravity as to entail a violation of the right to a tribunal established by law. It
then proceeded to find as follows.

Illegal obstruction of the construction site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Violations of the ECHR

Article 11
06/12/2020 10:25

JUDGMENT
The Religious Denomination of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Bulgaria v. Bulgaria 10.11.20 (app. no. 5301/11)
The right of believers of the doctrine of Jehovah’s Witnesses to freely express their faith and to have their own place of worship. Freedom of religion and freedom of assembly.
The applicant is an organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Bulgaria. It decided to build a temple, on her own property. The Mayor, by his decision, suspended the reconstruction works due to violation of urban planning provisions.
A court order was issued allowing the construction to continue, but the Mayor, due to legal action, failed to issue a decision to continue the works, instead publicly denouncing the doctrine of Jehovah’s Witnesses as a religion with a negative impact on its believers. The domestic courts did not find the mayor’s refusal to lift the suspension illegal.

Squatting of a hotel for 3 years for housing refugees. Conviction for violation of property rights and payment of 312,500 euros from Greece!

1st P - Article 1
04/12/2020 17:10

JUDGMENT
Papachela and Amazon S.A. v. Greece 03.12.20 (app. no. 12929/18)
The case concerned the occupation of a hotel for over three years by migrants and a group acting
out of solidarity with them. The hotel belongs to Ms Papachela and to a limited company, of which
she is the sole shareholder.
The applicants complained that the authorities had remained inactive when asked to evict the
squatters, who had remained in the hotel from April 2016 until July 2019, at which point they left
the premises of their own accord. In the meantime, the applicants had lodged a number of
complaints, which were either adjourned or not examined at all. A decision given by a Justice of the
Peace, ordering the eviction and recovery of possession of the hotel, was never enforced. During
that period Ms Papachela was forced to sell her house to cover the debts incurred as a result of the
squatters’ occupation (taxes, water and electricity bills) in order to avoid criminal proceedings.

Expulsion of a forged foreigner and his separation from his partner and their 3 children. The gravity of the offense cannot outweigh the best interests of the children. Violation of respect for family life!

Article 8
27/11/2020 20:36

ΑΠΟΦΑΣΗ
Unuane κατά Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου της 24.11.2020 (αρ. προσφ. 80343/17)
Απέλαση αλλοδαπού που καταδικάστηκε για πλαστογραφίες αδειών παραμονής. Χωρισμός του με σύντροφο και τρία παιδιά. Δικαίωμα σεβασμού της οικογενειακής ζωής.
Ο προσφεύγων υπήκοος Νιγηρίας, διέμενε μόνιμα με την σύντροφο του και τα τρία παιδιά τους στο Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο. Απελάθηκαν οικογενειακώς, πλην του τρίτου παιδιού, για λόγους δημόσιας τάξης και ασφάλειας καθόσον οι δύο γονείς καταδικάστηκαν για πλαστογραφία αδειών διαμονής. Οι αιτήσεις ακύρωσης της συντρόφου και των δύο παιδιών έγιναν δεκτές από τα εγχώρια Δικαστήρια, σε αντίθεση με αυτή του προσφεύγοντα, η οποία απορρίφθηκε και εκείνος αναγκάστηκε να αποχωρήσει από το Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο. Άσκησε προσφυγή για παραβίαση του άρθρου 8.

Freedom of expression is violated by the unlawful detention of a journalist during the performance of his duties. Detention is not compatible with the ECHR when there is no reasonable suspicion of guilt

Article 10
26/11/2020 14:57

JUDGMENT
Şık v. Turkey 24.11.2020 (app. no. 36493/17)
The case concerned the initial and continued pre-trial detention of the journalist Ahmet Şık, who
was suspected of disseminating propaganda in favour of organisations considered to be terrorist
organisations or of assisting them through articles and interviews published in the Turkish daily
newspaper Cumhuriyet and social media posts, all of which criticised government policy.
The Court held that Mr Şık could not be reasonably suspected, at the time of his placement in
detention, of having committed the offences of disseminating propaganda in favour of terrorist
organisations or assisting those organisations. In other words, the facts of the case did not support
the conclusion that a reasonable suspicion had existed against him. Accordingly, although imposed
under judicial supervision, the orders for Mr Şık’s initial and continued detention had been based on
mere suspicion.

The conditions of hygiene and detention of Geneva prisons were according to international standards. 3.39m² the individual space in the cell. No finding of degrading treatment

Article 3
24/11/2020 19:57

JUDGMENT
Bardali v. Switzerland 24.11.2020 (app. no. 31623/17)
The case concerned the applicant’s conditions of detention in Champ-Dollon Prison in the Canton of
Geneva.
The Court found, in particular, that the lack of personal space for the applicant in Champ-Dollon
Prison could not on its own constitute a breach of Article 3 of the Convention. Indeed, the individual
space available to the applicant, less than the 4 m² standard established by the European Committee
for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (CPT), had to be considered
together with the applicant’s other material conditions of detention in order to determine whether
or not there had been a violation of Article 3.

The violent arrest of a lawyer-protester by police constituted degrading treatment. ECHR violations due to arrests and overnight detention of protesters

Article 11
20/11/2020 15:43

JUDGMENT
Navalnyy and Gunko v. Russia 10.11.2020 (app. no. 75186/12)
Two protesters were arrested in Bolotnaya Square in Russia in May 2012 during a political demonstration against the government. Their overnight detention in a police station and administrative conviction for violating legal police orders.
One of the protesters, Aleksey Navalnyy, a lawyer and political activist, claimed in his application before the ECtHR that a police officer had used excessive force during his arrest. Both protesters also claimed that their arrest and overnight detention was unjustified and arbitrary, that the administrative proceedings against them were unfair, that the dissolution of the demonstration, their arrest and subsequent conviction were disproportionate and that these violations of their rights were intended to undermine the freedom of assembly.

The non-legislative provision for awarding damages for non-pecuniary damage for illegal detention violated the right of redress under Article 5 par. 5 of the ECHR

Article 5
18/11/2020 13:34

Lack of legislation for compensation for non-pecuniary damage due to illegal detention. Right of redress.

The applicant was sentenced to 3 years in prison for drug possession, which he served normally. The appellate court overturned the conviction and ruled that his detention was illegal.

The best interest of the child prevails over the right to communication with his mother’s ex-partner!

Article 8
12/11/2020 19:20

JUDGMENT
Honner v. France 12.11.2020 (app. no. 19511/16)
The case concerned the refusal to award contact rights to the applicant in respect of the child which
had been born to her former partner in Belgium using assisted reproductive techniques while the
two women were a couple, despite the fact that the applicant had raised the child during his early
years.