This week in Strasbourg - A roundup of the European Court of Human Rights' case law - week 42

POLICE POWER PLAY In the case of Gutsanovi v. Bulgaria (French only) the Court held that the arrest, detention and search at the home of parliamentarian Borislav Gutsanov breached the Convention. The case concerned a police operation carried out at the home of Mr Gutsanov, an influential politician, leading to his arrest. The events received widespread media coverage and were followed by statements from senior figures in the Bulgarian government.The Court held that the police operation amounted to degrading treatment because it had been planned and carried out without consideration for a number of factors including the nature of the criminal offences of which Mr Gutsanov was suspected, the fact that he had no history of violence and the possible presence of his wife and daughters in the house:

This week in Strasbourg - A roundup of the European Court of Human Rights' case law - week 41

CHILLING EFFECTS – ECtHR Cumhuriyet Vakfı and Others v. Turkey and Ricci v. Italy Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the Convention

In a legal context, a chilling effect is the inhibition or discouragement of the legitimate exercise of legal rights by the threat of legal sanction. The right that is most often described as being suppressed by a chilling effect is the right to free speech. The term chilling effect had been in use in the United States since as early as 1950. A chilling effect may be caused by legal actions such as the passing of a law, the decision of a court, or the threat of a lawsuit; any legal action that would cause people to hesitate to exercise a legitimate right (freedom of speech or otherwise) for fear of legal repercussions 

Nieuwsbrief Rechtspraak Europa no. 10 - oktober 2013 (European Courts' newsletter in Dutch)

Klik hier voor onze nieuwsbrief met een overzicht van de rechtspraak van de afgelopen maand van het Europese Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens in Straatsburg en het Hof van justitie van de Europese Unie in Luxemburg

This week in Strasbourg - A roundup of the European Court of Human Rights' case law - week 40

QUESTIONING THE USE OF PRE-TRIAL DETENTION - ECtHR Gonța v. Romania - Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (right to liberty and security)
 
Roundup by Marc de Werd

In her article Pre-Trial Detention: The Presumption of Innocence and Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights Cannot and Does Not Limit its Increasing Use, Lonneke Stevens is concerned with the question whether the presumption of innocence and the case-law of the European Court really make an argument against all too enthusiastic use of pre-trial detention:

“These days the use of pre-trial detention in Europe seems to be ever increasing. This is in spite of the fact that the the presumption of innocence tells authorities to be restrictive in pre-detaining suspects. It also seems contrary to the starting point of the European Court of Human Rights. Basing itself on the presumption of innocence the Court holds that a suspect should await his trial in freedom. For obvious reasons, the presumption of innocence and the European case-law are often invoked to either state that today’s pre-trial detention practises are in violation of both presumption and case-law or to say that pre-trial detention practise should take them more into account.”

In this week's case of Gonța v. Romania the applicant, Gheorghe Gonța, was arrested on suspicion of drug trafficking on 30 May 2003. He was initially acquitted on 4 October 2005 but eventually convicted and sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment on 4 December 2008. Relying in particular on Article 5 § 3 (right to liberty and security), he complained that he had been held in pre-trial detention for an unreasonably long time and that the Romanian courts had failed to provide reasons for the repeated extensions of his pre-trial detention. 

Nieuwsbrief Rechtspraak Europa no. 8/9 (augustus/september 2013) - (newsletter in Dutch)

Klik hier voor onze nieuwsbrief met een overzicht van recente rechtspraak van het Europese Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens in Straatsburg en het Hof van justitie van de Europese Unie in Luxemburg