ECHR President Costa to EuroFora:Serene on Human Rights Interlaken reform despite Attack+Negationism

Meanwhile, the desecration of a Jewish cemetery in Strasbourg, on the Anniversary of the Holocaust, strongly condemned by CoE's leadership and French Minister of the Interior Brice Hortefeux, who made un urgent visit here, brought to the forefront the issue of any "Negationists" who strive to hide even the most horrible Crimes of the Past, provoking Impunity of Criminals and augmenting the dangers to see them repeated, in one way or another, also in the Present times, unless European Court of Human Rights helps to guarantee that at least an elementary Jusice will be done, so that People can hope for a better common Future.

A topical concrete example was given by what is generally considered to be "the most grave Violations" of Human Rights : the plight of "MIssing" Persons, (who may suffer from Torture, deprivation of Liberty, Murder, etc), as it was recently illustrated "in the oldest case at ECHR", that of thousands of Greek Cypriot Missing people in Cyprus, where some Victims' Families and their Lawyers were recently "surprised", finding "unjust" and "uncomprehensible" the fact that their applications were, for the 1st time in ECHR's 60 years old History, declared Time-barred and "inadmissible" by a small ECHR Chamber with only 3 members, (out of 47 for the whole ECHR), despite ECHR's traditional case-law that violations of Human Rights in "Missing" persons' cases are "continuing", as long as there is no efficient enquiry to find what happened and who is responsible.

"EuroFora" asked ECHR's President if he was "afraid" of any "dangers" by "pressures to diminish Human Rights' protection" after recent violent "attacks", even by writing, from certain Governments, and in particular one who is due to take the ro !tating Chair of CoE's Committee of Ministers during 2010, (after already taking the Top Job of CoE Assembly's Chairman, earlier this week, for the 1st time in CoE's 65 Years-long History), while, at the same time bearing the main Responsibility for grave "bottlenecks" in the PanEuropean system of Human Rights' protection, suffering now mostly by the failures to implement ECHR's Judgements condemning violations of Human Rights, with result to provoke many repetitive individual applications, even if justified, as it was denounced by ECHR's leadership.

It was obviously needless to "name" that State explicitly at the Press Conference, since everyone who follows Human Rights issues easily understood that it was Turkey, who holds a Record among 47 CoE Member States by being the No 1 in Non-executed yet ECHR's judgements founding violations : Indeed, Ankara toples 19% of the Failures to implement ECHR's judgemens, (i.e. 1/5 of the total for 47 Countries !), for the entire period of 1959-2009, according to ECHR's latest Statistics.. Comparatively, the non-implemented yet ECHR judgements condemning Russia represent "only" 7% of the total, as well as those for Poland and France : about 6%. Only Italy has more (16%), but concerning more lenient cases, mainly of judicial "delays", while the persisting violations concerning Turkey, on the contrary, relate to extremely grave crimes, such as Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatments, Enforced "Disappearances", Killings, arbitrary deprivations of Liberty, Oppression of Freedom of Expression, Destructions and/or Usurpations of Family Homes and properties, etc.

- "ECHR is obviously a "jewel" for the CoE, despite difficulties, but, just before (the) Interlaken (ECHR Reform Conference), may be in view of Interlaken, as it is more or less known, some Attacks against the Court, by some quarters, some of them by Writting, ..from certain States, inside (CoE's) Committee of Ministers, etc., where there are also some developments this year (2010) that might be delicate", observed "EuroFora", obviously pointing at the November 2010-May 2011 ur. Without naming nobody, as a matter of general principle, do you feel that the Court might be, eventually, be threatened by Pressure to diminish its action on Human Rights issues ? And, in that case, where shall you find your Allies, partially or totally, in CoE's Parliamentary Asembly, in Public Opinion, In CoE's Secretary General, INGOS, or part of the Press ?'"

Replying in French ("because I know that you speak French very well", as ECHR's President said to "EuroFora"), Costa obviously downplayed the 2010/2011 risk : - "I am relatively Serene", ECHR's President replied, carefully.

- "ECHR has often been criticized by certain States, but not necessarily the same : F.ex. a long-standing Member Country as the UK, had launched very loud criticism against the (European) Court (of Human Rights), when, 15 or 20 Years ago, it had issued some Judgements that it found controversial. But, despite that, the UK remained a very solid support to the Court. And, at another, even more striking example, Switzerland, a constant supporter of the Court, as proves also the fact that it has recently decided to host the (February 2010) Interlaken Conference (on ECHR's Reform) to help the Court. But, when we had issued a judgement (fex. Belilos v. Switzerland) condemning her, Switzerland was ready to ..withdraw from the Court and from the CoE, in order to protest against the Legal (not Political) Interpretation that we had made then ! "

- "In any proceedings, National or International, there is always a loser and a winner (someone who loses, and someone who wins)", and "I observe that States win more cases than they lose, since many applications are rejected as inadmissible". But, "when they lose a case, that they consider as important, often this provokes a kind of unrest in the Public Opinion, and, then, it's natural that , at that moment, a State might be not satisfied, nor be in a very good mood.. "- "I remind you also another affair in Germany : the case "Caroline von Hannover", (on respect for Private and Family Life, etc), where Germany did not threaten to witrhdraw from the system (of protection of Hum an Rights), but, nevertheless, ECHR was strongly criticized".

- "Well, this arrives often", and "the fact that the States" involved in such reactions "are not always the same, but change, this also proves that we (ECHR) are quite objective and impartial", he concluded.

- Naturally, "it's not the same States who criticize" now, ECHR's President observed in reply to "EuroFora"'s question which obviously pointed at Turkey, generally known for its Blackmail-attitudes, as fex. when Ankara blocked even NATO's Summit, on April 2009 in Strasbourg, because it wasn't satisfied with its new Secretary General, Anders Rasmussen's supposed stance over Freedom of Expression, or persists to block EU - NATO cooperation on Security issues, over Ankara's claims on Cyprus, contrary to repeated EU Parliament's Resolutions which strongly denounce such negative attitude, (etc).

But, in CoE's Institutional mecanism, the only obvious ways to eventually attempt to blackmail the Court, by anyone who might get hold of CoE's rotating Committee of Ministers' chair, seem to be either to obstruct or delay, for 6 to 12 Months, the execution of ECHR's Judgements, or to try to block, delay or diminish its Funding, which comes from CoE's General Budget. (Something which is "the only obstacle to a full Independence of the Court", as ECHR's President observed earlier). But would anyone who was given a task to fulfil in the European mecanism for the protection of Human Rights, place his own salary higher than People's Human Rights ?

***

President Costa : ECHR supports outlawing Negationism.

---------------------------

- "Your ("EuroFora"'s) second question is very complicated, and I'd like to make a few, short remarks. Because there are 2 problems in the issue of Memory", ECHR's President added :

- "F.ex., on the Shoa, it's clear that direct Victims or Families of Shoa's victims, could not, as such, apply to the ECHR, because these are incidents which had occured even before ECHR was established, even before the (PanEUropean) Convention was signed".

- "But, on the contrary, we (ECHR) had some cases in which appliquants complained, in the name of Press Freedom, because they had been condemned, in one or another Country, for Negationism. "Fex., in a case against France : "Garaudy", ECHR had an opportunity to say that the condemnation of Negationism, i.e. of the fact to deny that there have been Victims of the Shoa, of Mass-Killings, etc., the condemnation of Negationists, was not opposed to Press Freedom, because Holocaust was a kind of Historic Catastrophe, whose Memory should be safeguarded".

- "Now, there are (also) other (such) events, which could have been covered by the (European) Convention (of Human Rights) from the Temporary point of view", (i.e. more recent, contemporary), "but are not necessarily linked to admissible applications. Because, as you know, there are, among admissibility conditions, also rules such as, fex., to respect a (Time) Deadline of 6 Months since the last act, or since the exhaustion of domestic remedies". "This also means that any event which occured very far away in the Past cannot necessarily become object for an admissible application to Strasbourg", he added carefully.

- "To take also another example, for the grave events during the former-Yugoslavia's clashes, the applications are inadmissible, because they are addressed against States which were not yet Members of the European Convention on HR", Costa also observed.

- "To be complete, ...I should develop also further on the distinction, that you ("EuroFora") know very well, between what is an "instantaneous act", and a "CONTINUING VIOLATION" (of Human Rights)", ECHR's President observed. "As, fex. in cases of Refugees/Displaced persons' Homes and Properties' deprivation, where ECHR judged that deprivation of properties is a "Continuing" violation, which must be distinguished from the instantaneous acts, and, therefore, is not submitted to the usual Time Deadline limits.

- "But this (i.e. to "develop" the notion of "Continuing" Violations) risks to be too long", felt Costa, .. curiously leaving the specific cases cited at "EuroFora"'s question without a clearly expicit answer. ..

Unless readers are supposed to inevitably conclude that ECHR's President agreed with our question's observation that any Crimes eventually committed against "Missing" People, remain, according to "ECHR"s long-standing case-law, "continuing", i.e. without Time-limits and deadlines for Victims' Families' applications to Strasbourg, as long as the respondent State did not make any efficient investigation to discover the truth on what really happened to the victims, find and punish those responsible for their enforced disappearances. ..

- "I cannot comment on (small Chamber's) decisions, as long as there is not any Final Judgement" (by ECHR's Grand Chamber, or if applicants don't contest formally a controversial initial decision, as in this case), Costa observed earlier, at another affair, but as a matter of general principle.

Therefore, (and given also the fact that the latest ECHR's Grand Chamber's judgement on "Missing" people's cases : the "Varnava" affairs in Cyprus : October 2009, uses an unprecedented Formula, apparently introducing for the 1st time, eventual Time limits, but in a way which leaves it open to interpretation on the crucial point to know whether it is also the behavior of Victims' Families, and not only the mere passage of Time, which really counts, since the contrary, would risk to cover up grave Crimes, (such as Holocaust, Mass Graves, War Crimes, etc) that CoE's Secretary General, Thorbjorn has just denounced, in the name of a better Future for Europe (See supra).

Until this crucial point is settled in a crystal-clear way, legitimate quesions and concerns inevitably remain on whether violent attacks against ECHR (particularly by a State which holds Top CoE jobs in 2010/2011, while being at the same time the No 1 responsiblke for the problem of non-execution of ECHR's judgements - See supra) will oblige it to make some dangerous concessions on Human Rights, or, on the contrary, ECHR will succeed to mark a major breakthrough with decisive advances on Human Rights' protection.

After all, isn't it natural to feel that what will really happen on February 2010 at Interlaken, is a kind of "Mystery", at least for the moment, considering also the fact that this same location ; Interlaken, has been notoriously chosen even for famous Science Fiction writer Erich von Deniken for his .. "Mystery Park" ?

***