english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home arrow newsitems arrow ECHR President Spano to EF on Rulings execution by Turkey on Cyprus Missing+Refugees=Clear+No Margin

ECHR President Spano to EF on Rulings execution by Turkey on Cyprus Missing+Refugees=Clear+No Margin

Written by ACM
Thursday, 28 January 2021



*Strasbourg/Angelo Marcopolo/- Replying to a Question raised by "Eurofora", on New Prospects about ECHR Judgement Execution Problems by Turkey in Grave Violations on Cyprus' "Missing" Persons and Refugees from the Territories still under Foreign Military Occupation, New ECHR's President, Robert Spano, during his Annual 2021 Press Conference, stressed, in Substance, that there is a very "Clear Obligation" to abide with the Strasbourg Court's Rulings, "withOut Margin" of Dispute in such Cases of Clearly Defined Obligations. In the Discussion opened by that, Spano further Urged CoE's Committee of Ministers to make Fulfill Commitments on which is Founded the PanEuropean Human Rights' System, in a "Real" way, (See Infra).

+ Interestingly, this Fresh Move came the Same Week that CoE's Parliamentary Assembly just Debated in Public, Voted and Adopted a Resolution and a Recommendation adressed to CoE's Committee of Ministers, the body Officialy entrusted to Supervise Member States' Execution of ECHR's Judgements, Urging to Boost concrete Measures for Implementation, Particularly in such Grave and Long-Standing Cases where a Recalcitrant State (like Turkey, here, for More than 20 Years !) obstinately Refuses to abide during a Long Period of Time, (See also Infra). In Addition, a New CoE's "Weapon", due to be used Jointly by its Assembly and Ministers against particularly Grave Violations of the PanEuropean Organisation's Basic Values, was Adopted this Same Week, and Repeatedly Cited at MEPs' Debates in relation with Turkey, (See Infra).

++ Moreover, Recently, a New Possibility to eventually UnBlock Turkey's Obstacle, thanks to EU-CoE Cooperation among ECHR+ECJ's Euro-Judges, between Strasbourg and nearby Luxembourg, is Officialy Cited by the Latest "Addendum" in that New PACE's Report (See relevant, Earlier "Eurofora"s Publication at: http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/eucoecoopversusturkishechrblockade.html, etc), which was Evoked by "Eurofora"'s original Question addressed to the ECHR, Clearly put by Writting, (See Infra),

Even if it was, unfortunately, Skiped at an Oral Re-Transmission of most Journalists' Questions through UnPrecedented Technical a.o. Problems in this 2021 Annual Press Conference, in a Physically Empty ECHR's Press-Room, due to Virus and Other Obstacles, shortly After a Scandalous Turkish Cyber-Aggression of ECHR's Internet Web-Site and Network, during 4 Long Days (sic !), immediately After anOther Landmark Judgement (of December 22, 2020, i.e. at the Eve of Christmas+New Year Recess), Condemning Ankara for a Dissident Politician's imPrisonement, Inhuman/Degrading Treatments, etc., ("Demirtas" affair)...  

Such an Exceptional Obstacle Hindered ECHR's President from a Timely Chance to pronounce himself on such a New Chance to eventualy UnBlock ECHR Judgements' Execution by Turkey on a Key Group of Grave and too Long-Duration Violations of Human Rights, Practicaly Obstructing also an Eventual ECHR - ECJ Top-Level discreet Exchange of Views, perhaps on the Occasion of Usual Contacts between Top Euro-Judges at the Beginning of the New Judicial Year.  



- Referring to "Eurofora"s Question, (Transmitted by E-Mail, in doubly Exceptional Circumstances : See Infra + Supra), the Experienced Patrick Titiun, Long-Time Head of ECHR President's Office, in charge of Press Relations, observed that "Mr. Marcopolos" pointed mainly on Problems on the Execution of ECHR's Judgements, particularly by Turkey, and asked for Spano's Position.

- "The Answer, at a General level, under Article 46 of the (PanEuropean Human Rights') Convention, is absolutely Clear : There is a Binding, Unequivocable, Obligation of Each (CoE's) Member State, to Execute the Judgements of the Court !", Firmly stressed, from the outset, President Robert Spano, in Reply to that "Eurofora"s Question.

+ "The Execution Process, However, is Not on the Court's Table. It is for CoE's Committee of Ministers. It is there where the Debate occurs, Between the Member States and the CM, on the Way in which a State Intends to Execute...", he pointed out. I.e. "the End Result of the Execution Process, is Not an Issue for the Court. And, therefore, I must, myself, and the Court itself must be very Prudent, in taking any Public Position on Individual Cases", he added Carefuly on the Concrete Ways and Consequences.

++ "But, the General Principle is Clear", the ECHR President reiterated.


+++ "And", in Addition, "the Clearer the Court is, itself, in Indicating the Measures in question, the Usual Practices", (then), "the Less Margins the State has in Deciding on How it Intends to Execute it.", he Warned, Advancing Further.

=> "F.ex., if there is a Clear Indication, in a Judgement of the Court, for the Release of a certain Person, (etc), the Margin in the Debate on the Execution of that Judgement in the (CoE's) Committee of Ministers, is Significantly Reduced", Robert Spano concluded.

>>> This Supplementary Point Obviously has an Important Practical Bearing in "Eurofora" Question's cases, (Comp. Supra), since it concerned Affairs in which the ECHR had Fixed a Certain Reparation to be Given by Turkey to Cyprus' "Missing" Persons' Families or to Refugees/Displaced Persons, including Even the normal Timing and concrete Consequences in case of (and in proportion to) any Eventual Delay...

+ Moreover, as ECHR's President had Just Warned, in his General Introductory Remarks, at the Beginning of this Annual Press Conference for 2021, -"However, it is clear that the Member States Must (i.e. Ministers, MEPs, etc) Secure in Deeds, Not just Words, that the (PanEuropean) Court is Capable of continuing to Fulfill the Functions entrusted to it under the Convention (on Human Rights), a Role which has never been as Important as Exactly Now, at This very Moment : -The Authority of the Court, and the Binding nature of its Judgments, should Not be called into Question. Binding nature of court Judgments, and legal certainty are Fundamental elements of the Rule of Law, which is a Constitutional Principle that Underlies the whole of the (PanEuropean uman Rights') Convention System", he had Urged.




+ Immediately After Our Question, Pursuing Further a Main Point in that Discussion Opened by "Eurofora", our Collegue, J.J. Degibier (of "L'Humanité" Newspaper, former Long-Time Executive at "France-TV"), Obviously Intrigued by that Part of ECHR Judgements' Execution which reportedly Depends also on Other CoE's Organs, and particularly its Committee of Ministers, (Comp. Supra), Went on to Add an Inevitable and Natural Supplementary Question, mainly about "the ECHR's Credibility", "which, in Fact, is at Stake", "Behind that Issue", and "What is the Current Trend Nowadays ?"

- "You mean on the specific issue of the Execution of ECHR's Judgements,  or on the Wider Issue, of ECHR's Auhority in general ?", Spano wondered.

- "Yes, the Issue of the Institution (ECHR), and the Execution of its Decisions", that Journalist turned around both interelated Aspects, Obviously Linked with "Eurofora"s Question...

 - "I think that it's Important to Relativise a little bit this Debate on ECHR Judgements' Execution, and the Credibility, the Authority of the Court. Because, in Fact, the (main, general) Developments are Positive : There are More Cases which are Executed by Member States, in Comparison with Previous Years", (Independently of Turkey, and some others). "However, it's clear, and that's a result of our Polarized Ambiance, under more Political Tension (Recently), that the Cases which National States Find Difficult for them, at a National Level, get a Visible Trend to Challenge ECHR's Judgements !", he Denounced.

- But, at any case, "it's Not for Me, Neither for the ECHR, to enter into Any Kind of National Debates. The Obligation of Each (CoE's) Member State, under the (Human Rights') Convention is Clear. This has Nothing to do with a Debate on the Binding, or not, character of ECHR's Decisions. That's an Issue Legaly Clear. !.. ", Spano Reiterated, as he had just stressed to "Eurofora", (Comp. Supra).

=> In consequence, -"It's up to the Politicians, inside the (CoE's) Committee of Ministers, (and) at a National Level, to Undertake Commitments, which are at the Base of the (PanEuropean) Convention (of Human Rights), in a Real Way. That's it !"..., resumed, in Fine, ECHR's President, obviously Making an Appeal to the Crucial Resposibility of CoE's Ambassadors/Permanent Representatives, backed by Foreign Ministers, CoE Assembly and/or National MEPs, National Governments, etc..., (and, why not, also EU's Politicians, MEPs, Judges, etc, at least as far as the Specific Aspects of the Cases cited by "Eurofora" are Concerned : Comp. Supra and Infra).



>>> By a Timely "Coincidence", it's this Same Week that CoE's Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) has Just Debated in Public, Voted and Adopted a Resolution and a Recommendation on the latest Developments about, precisely, the Execution of ECHR's Judgements, according to a Report Drafted by MEP Constantinos Efstathiou, from Cyprus, where PACE Quasi-Unanimously (concerning that "Recommendation", which had Not any Amendment proposed to Vote) Urged CoE's Committee of Ministers, in Charge of Supervising that Execution, inter alia, also, in particular, to :

- "give Priority to Leading Cases Pending for over 5 Years", and "Transfer... Leading Cases examined under standard procedure and Pending for over 10 Years to Enhanced Supervision procedure", (which Concern Most of the Cases Eyed by "Eurofora"s Written Question : Comp. Supra and Infra).

- "take measures aimed at ensuring Greater  Tansparency of the process of Supervision of the Implementation of Court Judgments", (i.e. Naturaly Including Journalists and NewsMedias, etc).

+ "organising special Debates on Leading Cases Pending for over 10 Years", (Ibid).

>>> Most Important : - "Use .... the Procedures provided for in Article 46, §3 to 5, of the Convention (on Human Rights), in the event of Implementation of a jJudgment encountering Strong Resistance from the respondent State".

This includes, particularly, the possibility, for a 2/3 Majority (No Need of Unanimity) at CoE's Committee of Ministers, If any Member State "Refuses to Abide by a Final Judgement" of ECHR concerning it, then, to "Refer to the Court the Question whether that [State] has Failed to fulfil its [Basic] Obligation" to "Abide by the Final Judgement of the Court in any Case to which [it is] Party". And, "If the Court Finds a Violation" on that Key point, then, "it Shall Refer the Case to the (CoE's) Committee of Ministers, for consideration of the Measures to be Taken", as the PanEuropean Convention on Human Rights prescribes.

Naturaly, such an "Ultimum Remedium" Move "Shoulld ... be done Sparingly, and in very Exceptional Circumstances", (as also in those concerned by "Eurofora"s Full, Written Question : Comp. Supra +Infra), MEPs Carefuly advised.

>>> But, at the same time, PACE's Quasi-Unanimously Adopted ReCommendation of 2021 clearly "Welcomes the Use of (such) Procedures, provided for in Article 46, §3 - §5 of the Convention (on Human Rights), in the Case of Ilgar Mammadov (a Long-Time Jailed Dissident) v. Afghanistan", Recently, with Succesful Results on 2018, Urging CoE's Committee of Ministers to Do so ..."Once Again" also in Other even More, Grave Cases !


=> And, Indeed, Turkey, (Often, but Not Always Followed by Russia, if not Ukraine, etc), was Criticaly Mentioned, Many Times this week in Strasbourg, by Various Countries' and Political Group's MEPs, during PACE's Relevant Debate, Denouncing Cases like that of Cyprus and/or Dissidents f.ex. Kavala or Demirtas' Jailings, etc., in order to Urge to Use the Article 46 above-mentioned Procedure and/or any Other Efficient Measure, (including, Even a New, Joint and Complementary Procedure, desiged to be Triggered by Both the CoE's Parliamentary Assembly and its Committee of Ministers, Together, against any Member State which Seriouslly Undermines the Organisation's Basic Values, nick-named by some as "the Nuclear Weapon" !)...

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Significantly, this Move includes, among many others, also, f.ex., the Conservative British MEP John Howell, (speaking on Behalf of his Group),  up to the President of the Group of Euro-LEFT, Dutch Senator Tiny Kox, but also the German SocialDemocrat MEP Frank Schwabe, (speaking on Behalf of his Group), Conservative Armenian MEP Mikayel Melkumyan, Irish Leftist MEP Paul Gavan, PACE's vice-President and German ChrsistianDemocrat MEP Andreas Nick, French Center-Right MEP Francois Calvet, (etc).

    This concerns MEPs who Spoke at PACE's Specific Debate on ECHR Judgements' Execution (Comp. Supra). But the Issue was Also Raised, in Addition, by Other, even More MEPs, Later-on, in Questions to the CoE's Chairman in Office, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, (while the Neighbouring Country is Already in Pre-Electoral Period for the Crucial Vote of September 2021), and his main Reply was to Acknowledge the Fact that : -"We (CoE) have to Increase the Pressure" on Turkey and other recalcitrant member States, as far as ECHR Judgements' Implementation is concerned...

=> All these Converging Moves (Comp. Supra) made several MEPs, from Germany and Elsewhere, feel that CoE's "Committee of Ministers is Willing.... to take Tough Measures, ...if the Court Rulings are Not Implemented", and "that is why this is ,,, Now a very Serious Moment", (as, f.ex., inter alia, it's also German "Socialist" MEP Shwambe who boasted).


However, Past Experiences, and some Recent Facts (See also Infra), Warn to be Cautious... Even if a Serious, profound Positive Change might be, indeed, both Possible, in Reach, and Badly Needed, Nevertheless, more Errors, or even Foul Play, are Not Excluded at all...


-First of all, Some Usual Presentations of Human Rights' Violations' numbers per Country are astonishingly Misleading, as Facts Prove : In particular, an ersatz Claim that "7 Member States" would be Responsible for Most ECHR Condemnations, Hides the Fact that mainly Turkey, Followed by Russia (sometimes also Ukrania, starting by  ...18 Years Old Problems !), appear too Far Ahead, Before all Others...


+ Indeed, inter alia, Turkey has been Condemned by the ECHR for Various Human Rights' Violations, much More Times than Russia, in Most Categories, until 2020 included : A Total of 3.309 Condemnations of Turkey, instead of just 2.724 for Russia, (Despite their Difference in Population, between 84 and 146 Millions of Inhabitants, respectively)...                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

F.ex., Official Data, Just Released by the ECHR Today, show 688 Condemnations v. Turkey, instead of 671 v. Russia on protection of Properties ; 12 v. Turkey, instead of 6 v. Russia on Elections ;  7 instead of 3 on Education; 108 instead of 68 on Demonstrations and Associations; 387 instead of 95 on Free Speach ; 12 instead of 11 on Thought, Conscience and Religion; 5 instead of 3 in "No Punishment WithOut Law"; 675 instead of 365 on "Length of Proceedings or No Enforcement" of Judges' Rulings ; 953 instead of 935 on "Fair Trial", etc.

As well as, to be more Accurate, in Proportion to their Populations : 2,26 Condemnations of Turkey instead of 1,50 on Russia per 10 Millions of Inhabitands on "Discrimination"; 93,6 Condamnations of Turkey instead of 82,3 on Russia per 10 Millions of Inhabitants on "Personal Liberty", etc.

- But, on "Private - Family life", things appear almost Equal, with 15 Condemnations in Turkey instead of 16 in Russia, per 10 Millions of Inhabitants. While, Changing, Recently, even Further, on "Remedies", "Life" and "Ill-Treatment" issues, Turkey was Pictured as if it was there, reportedly, a little bit "Less Bad" than Russia, (who faced a Notorious "Russia-Bushing" inside the CoE since the Obama-Biden induced Division of Europe over Ukraine Since 2014), with 281 Condemnations instead of 660, (Ukraine growing up to 340, and even small Slovenia to 266...), in the 1st area, followed by 43,3 instead of 48,1 per 10 Millions of Inhabitants in the 2nd area, and 70,8 instead of 135,8 (with Ukraine growing up to 87,3) per 10 Millions Inhabitants in the 3rd area.

However, this Exceptional and Late Part Might Either be Misleading, or Soon due to be CounterBalanced by New incoming Data, Including an Evolving Augmentation of Condemations v. Turkey as the Post-2016 "Putch Attempt" pretext of unprecedented level Massive Oppression "Tsunami" Cases have just Started to Arrive at Strasbourg's Euro-Judges, according to ECHR's President Spano... Probably to be Joined Also by the Late 2015 Kurdish Minority Cities' Massacre inside Turkey, the 2018 Afrin Syrian Region Invasion and Occupation, (Obliging, after Deadly Battles, the Local Population to Flee and reportedly Usurpating 1/3 of the Refugees' Family Homes, Private Properties and Ancestral Land), the 2019 Kurdish Syrian Regions' Military Invasion and Occupation, (with Brutal Murders and Brutalities over Dead Corpses of Peaceful Civilian Women Politicians, f.ex. of "Future Syria", etc), as well as the 2020 Turkish Deadly MIlitary Interferences, Extended even to Proxy Islamist Extremist Armed Gangs, Mercenaries controled by Ankara, from Libya and Syria up to Armenia, (with even Heads of Elder Civilian Prisoners at Artsak being atrociously Cut and Excibited at the Internet !), etc...


+ In Addition, anOther, relevant Presentation, made this Week by a Turkish MEP during PACE's Debates, Claiming to cite CoE's allegedly Official Data, apparently Raises Critical Questions :

- Indeed, according to that Turkish Source, Ankara boastes that they would have managed to Surprizingly Lower the Number of still Open and Pendng Cases of Violations of Human Rights Recently, particularly by Cutting it ...Half on 2019 !

The Claim was that Turkey wold have "Closed" "132 Cases in 2017", "372 in 2018", and ..."732 in 2019", while, at the Same Time, the Number of "Pending" Cases "before the (CoE's) Committee of Ministers" would have "Decreased ...from "1.593 in 2016, to 1.287 on 2018", and ... "689 on 2019", i.e. Two Statisticaly Improbable Big Changes, Both on 2019, which, Suddenly, made "Evaporate" More than 50% of Turkey's Condemnations by ECHR...

In fact, Notoriously, 2019 was a Year of Change of CoE's Secretary General, (after 10 Years of Thornbjorn Jagland, succeeded by Mariaj Buric-Pejcinovic), and such Exceptional Moments are, generaly, considered as a "Break" for some Petty Bureaucrats, who may, Suddenly, act Abusively for a while, Exploit a short "Vacuum" of Power, Hidden inside such Big Organisations, when a former Leading Team goes Away, Leaving an UnExperienced yet New Team Face Old and New Challenges... During 30 Years of Experience in European, PanEuropean and/or International Organisations, we hav Often Seen Various, smaller or bigger Abuses Committed, indeed, by a few Corrupted Bureaucrats at such Exceptional Moments, by Scandalously Exploiting a Short Gap of Experience by a New Leadership, Bypassed, Manipulated and/or Misleaded by them, Before they can really take over with a Full Conscience and Knowledge of what is really at Stake in any concrete (and Often Complex or Delicate) Matter... Various such incidents have been witnessed in the Past, Both inside EU Parliament, and the CoE, etc, mutatis-mutandis, with Manifold Consequences, f.ex.,concerning Freedoms, Efficiency, Reputation of Individual Persons, Working Hours, Established Security Practices, Administrative Organisation, Foreign Policy, BioEthics, Press and Medias, etc., as well as, in the Present case : Turkey's Statistics...

>>> However, the Exceptional Gravity of Turkey's Condemnations by the ECHR in the Judgements evoked by "Eurofora"'s Full, Written (See Infra) Question, (practicaly Obliged to put through the Internet : Comp. Supra and Infra), was Undeniable and Crystal-Clear, since it concerned Ankara's Scandalous UnWillingness to Find and Punish those Responsible for Serious, Tragic Crimes (Mostly Revealed After 2010), and the Enforced Disappearances of Thousands of "Missing" People in Cyprus, since the 1974 Turkish Military Invasion and still Persisting Foreign illegal Occupation of the Northern Part of the Strategic EU Member Island, (Ignoring even the Victims' Families), added to Hundreds of Thousands of Refugees/Displaced Persons from those Occupied Territories,, Obliged to Flee the Turkish Army, while the their Family Homes, Private Properties, and Ancestral Land were Brutaly Usurpated, mainly by Massively Imported Foreign Settlers from Turkish Anatolia Plateau, while the Victims are Still Hindered by Turkey to Return back to their Ancestral Land... As for the Period of Time During which, Relevant ECHR's Judgements Condemning Ankara for suc blatant Violations of Human Rights, have been Scandalously still "Pending" in Strasbourg, withOut Any Execution, it's, Notoriously, Exceptonaly Too Long, Basically around ..."20 Years" (+2001-2021 !), as it was Denounced during PACE's Debates this week... (reportedly Approached Only by some Ukranian cases 18 Years old, about National Courts' rulings inefficiency, in much more Lenient cases)...

+ In Addition, what is, apparently, Even More Interesting and Topical in that "Eurofora"s Question to President Spano's Annual Press Conference, is the "NEW" Fact, that at least some among those ECHR Judgements concerned Seem Nowadays well to have a Chance to Be Implemented in a Much ...EASIER Way, than All Other Similar Cases ! Indeed, according to PACE's relevant Report which was Debated among MEPs at the Plenary this Week in Strasbourg, as well as to an "Eurofora"s relevant Article already Published Last Week, (See : ..., etc),  for that purpose, it's Not Necessary at all, Neither to Trigger that "Nuclear Weapon" Created this Same Week as a "Joint Procedure" for the PACE and  the Committeee of Ministers Together, against a Membr State which has Betrayed  CoE's Basic Principles, (Comp. Supra), Nor the Article 46 Procedure, against States Refusing to Abide by one or more ECHR Judgments, (which Needs 2/3 Majority of Votes : Comp. Supra).                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

Instead, since the Cases concerned here consist in Turkey's persisting Refusals to pay any Indemnisation awarded by the ECHR to "Missing" People Families, Nor to Refugees/Displaced persons, (Comp. Supra), practicaly Obliging the CoE's Committee of Mnisers to Vainly Repeat, during Many Years, that Ankara has a Legal Obligation to do so, again and again, until it becomes a kind of ..."Mazochism" in front of Turkey's repeated Refusals, as long as the CoE does Not take Any Measure of Sanction against Ankara's Systematic Obstruction, (See the Facts, f.ex. at : http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/coemazochismfacingturkishcontemptofechrjudgmentsoncyprusrefugeesmissingpersons.html, + http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/turkeyblocksechrjudgementswhilevictimsdie.html, etc), then, a Cypriot Refugee recently Decided to Use a Different Pathway : He asked from EU Commission to Seize the Amount awarded by ECHR among the EU Funds earmarked for Turkey's Controversial and UnPopular EU "Accession Bid, and, when Brussels initially Declined to do so, he lodged a Legal Complaint to the ECJ at nearby Luxembourg, using Both CoE and EU Laws !

=> So that, IF the ECJ and ECHR Cooperate Adequately, in that kind of still Recently Pending case, known as "Ramon v. Turkey", then, precisely, Thanks to such a Simple and Efficient EU - CoE Cooperation, the Problem would be Immediatly Solved, since Turkey's stuborn, immoral and illegal Obstruction would be Easily, Legaly and Moraly ByPassed !  (And if, Meanwhile, the EU adhered into the PanEuropean Convention of Human Rights, as Lisbon's Treaty asks Since 2010, then, such Practical Solutions coulld become a Simple Formality... So that President Juncker's Historic Report on EU-CoE Cooperation, commanded by CoE's Heads of State/Govenment Summit of 2004 in Warsaw, and Published around 2007-2008 in Strasbourg, which Already Focused Mainly on EU-CoE Synergy for Human Rights, would Start having another Concrete Application : Instead of ).


>>> However, Unfortnately, for UnCertain Yet reasons (Comp. Supra and mainly Infra), Surprizingly, it's Also a Fact that, at least for the Moment, in Real Practice, "Eurofora" was, Exceptionaly, Hindered to Clearly and Fully Transmit to this 1/2021 ECHR's Press Conference the Full Extent of Our Above-mentioned Question, and Not Even its Main, potentialy Positive Meaning !

The main "Technical" Obstacle was the Fact that, Curiously, in Addition to the Virus' Pandemic, which had Hindered Most Journalists to come Physically on the Spot,  Leaving ECHR's Press-Room practicaly Empty, for the 1st Time in history, that Exceptional ECHR's Annual Press Event, UnExpectedly, did Not even Use Any kind of "Video-Conference" Links, Contrary to what did All Other CoE, EU, UNO, OSCE, etc, European/International Organisations, and Even Most Other National, Social, Universitarian, NGO, etc., Press Conferences, almost Everywhere, at Any Other such Collective Encounter Nowadays... On the Contrary, Journalists were Asked to ...Write their Questions, and Transmit them, to an Anonymous Press Secretariat, by E-Mail (sic !)... Even then, Astonishingly, the Journalist had Not Any Guarantee at all that his/her Question would, at last, be Read and Transmitted, Neither could he Know iF, HOW, and WHO among the 2 or 3 Menbers of the ECHR's Secretariat that Handled his Text, Might, Eventualy, Ommitt, Difform, Partialy or Totally Censor, All or Part of his Original Text...

    => And that's What really Happened, this time :  "Eurofora"s Original Question (See a Full Copy, Attached Herewith) was Not Transmitted to the ECHR President, Neither Read Aloud at this Press Conference ! Only a very Small Part of it was Hastily Mentioned, while Ommitting Most of its Key Points : F.ex, Nothing was said aloud about the "ECJ", Neither about an "EU - CoE Cooperation" possibility, Nor about the Way that those Cyprus' Refugees Hoped to Solve the Problem posed by Turkey's Stuborn and Many Times Repeated Refusal to pay the Just Satisfaction Awarded by the ECHR, So that Nobody Heard Now about a New Possibility to UnBlock a Serious Obstacle in the Execution of ECHR's Judgements, even WithOut being Obliged to use the above-Mentioned "Heavy" Procedure of Article 46 (Comp. Supra), And, in Consequence, that prospect of Innovation in the Legal Instruments used in favor of Human Rights, via some EU's Notoriously Controversial and UnPopular pre-Accession Funds earmarked for Turkey, was Escamotated, practicaly Muzzled, (Despite the Fact that it was contained in a Recently Lodged Legal Complaint at nearby Luxembourg, Mentioned in a CoE Assembly's Official Report Just Debated and Voted in Strasbourg, as well as Evoked by a Journalist in his Written Question to ECHR's Annual Press Conference for 2021, (etc)... So that President Spano, was Practicaly Deprived from a Timely Occasion to be Informed, Think, and Express his Opinion on such a New Legal Tool, perhaps Able to Solve a Serious Problem in the Execution of ECHR's Judgements, by a Simple Judicial Cooperation with the ECJ !        


>>> Why all that UnPrecedented (and Easy to Avoid) Mess ?

- If, perhaps, Not the Real Cause, at least the Tecnical Pretext, Obviously was the Astonishing Exclusion of any "Video-Conference" at the Annual ECHR's Press Conference for 2021, that would Allow for Journalists' simple and Direct Participation, as with the EU in Brussels, the UN at NY or Geneva, Paris, Berlin, and even with the CoE in Strasbourg (Despite a Notoriously Dangerous Virus' Pandemic, an Exceptionaly, and Spectaculary ..."Empty" ECHR's Press-Room, and Abundant Technical Resources Offering Efficient Solutions and Often used, including by "Eurofora" a.o.).                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

- What Exceptional Obstacle Excluded that Simple, Efficient, and Widely Used Nowadays Technical Possibility, in a so Important Event as ECHR President's Annual Press Conference for 2021 ?

- "Eurofora" had Already Raised that Issue, even Twice and by Writting, Both at a Previous E-Mail to the ECHR, and inside Today's E-Mail which Contained our Questions to President Spano's Press Conference (Comp. supra). But, in the Absence of Immediate Replies, there was No more Time to pursue that Issue Now, since, inter alia, in Addition to this ECHR's Annual Press Conference, we had also to Reply to some UnExpected Phone Calls, as well as to Actively Participate in Other "Video-Conferences", including a Long Press Conference with Paris, about Topical International Issues of Exceptional Importance, (etc).


=> However, a Plausible Explanation seems to have been Given, Indirectly but Very Probably, by a subsequent Exchange between a Young Collegue from the French Press Agency "AFP", and ECHR's New Registrar, Miss Marialena Tsirli, to whom President Spano pointed in order to Reply to a Question, during Today's Press Conference, about an Exceptional Incident which had Notoriously occured towards the End of December 2020 against ECHR :

>>> That French Journalist Asked about what had really happened during an UnPrecedented ..."Cyber-Attack" against the PanEuropean Court "when a Judgement on Turkey was Published", as she noted. Registrar Tsirli Replied, in substance, that, indeed, a Serious Cyber-Attack had Targetted the ECHR's WebSite on December 22, (i.e., when Euro-Judges Published an Exceptionaly Important series of Condemnations of Turkey - for InHuman/Degrading Treatments", Violations of "Freedom of Expression" and of "Personal Freedom", "UnFair Trial", etc-  in the Famous "Demirtas" case). She Denounced that the Cyber-Attack" had practically Blocked ECHR's WebSite "During Four (4) Days !" (Between Christmas and New Eve)...

+ Interestingly, it's Not the Computers Inside the ECHR's Building which had been Targetted by that Sly Aggression, But Just the ECHR's Communications with, and Impact towards, the Outer World, (i.e., Press and Medias, Journalists, Politicians, Society, Lawyers, Experts, Citizens, Victims, etc).

=> Thus, it Obviously seems Probable that it was, apparently, for That Reason, that Today, as a matter of Precaution, ECHR's Annual 2021 Press Conference had to take place in front of an Exceptionaly Empty Press Room, and Even withOut Any "Video-Conference" Link for Journalists (Comp. Supra)...


In Such UnPrecedented and Exceptional Conditions, it's Not a Surprize that an Agent of Turkish Establishment's Media appeared Glad to be Free to Speak 1st of All, and Raise, practicaly Three (3) Questions in a Series, Video-Taped ...Alone, at an Empty Room withOut Any Journalist Behind him, (as Never Seen Before in ECHR's History of the Last 27 Years : 1993 - 2021 !), while, on the Contrary, f.ex. "Eurofora", Despite even a Physical Handicap provoked Recently After a Long Series of Sly Aggressions, was, on the Conrary, Obliged to be Deprived even from elementary Sleep OverNight and at Early Morning, in order to Desperately Try to make Various Phone Calls, Prepare, Write and Send several E-Mails, etc., in order to Attempt to Participate at least Remotely at that Important Annual Press Conference on Human Rights, (where we had Always taken an Active part, with Only 1 Unique Exception in about 30 Years...), withOut, Finally, being really Free to Raise, at least, Not Even One (1) Complete Question at all ! (See relevant Facts cited Supra)...











Visitors: 54960030


Login Form

Remember me

Lost your Password?
No account yet? Create account


RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3

Other Menu



They voted to "freeze" UK Government's draft to put People in jail for 42 Days on "anti-terrorist" suspicion without charge, or they abstained. Don't they look suspect ?

CoE's debate on UK controversy stirs PanEuropean check of anti-terror suspects' imprisonment

Former Leftists of the Sixties would boil in hot water if they heard PACE's debate on the controversial 42 days detention without charge, currently drafted by the British Government :

A "Socialist" Government, a Socialist PACE Rapporteur and a Socialist Chair of PACE's Legal Committee, opposed a .. "Conservative" amendment (supported by .. Liberals, Democrats, etc), to freeze the measure, in order to protect Citizens' Freedom, by "waiting" until CoE's Venice Committee checks its conformity with Human Rights' principles.

"Left"'s support to Conservative-Lib.Dem's criticism, wasn't enough to obtain a majority, nor to make things as they were back in the good old days, when "Left" and "Right" had a clear meaning, as "liberty" and "restrictions"...

Conservatives and most Democrats were joined by the Left in voting for the "freeze", as well as Liberal Paul Rowen, while Socialist MEP Ivan Popescu, an experienced MEP from Ukraine (PACE Member since 1996-2008) abstained. But most Socialists, added to a few Liberals and EPP's Right, voted against.

Fortunately, someone inside PACE had the wise idea to shorten the Debate for less than 1 Hour, and put it on the Agenda only at the end of an exceptionally busy day, towards the end of the Evening, when most MEPs had already gone to taste wins and foods at various Receptions all around Strasbourg's "European" area : As a result, not even 42 MEPs weren't present..

Socialist Lord Tomlinson accused the leaders of the PanEuropean Assembly, in its highest body : the "Bureau", to "lack wisdom" by deciding to hold a Debate on an issue that neither the Socialist Chair of the Legal Committee, nor its Socialist "reluctant Rapporteur", did "not want to do", ...


Finally, everybody (critics and supporters alike) was happy to agree, in substance, that the controversial measure "may" gravely violate Human Rights, and therefore, PACE asked Legal Experts of Venice Commission to check UK Government''s plans.

But this might take more than .. 42 Days to do, since PACE's Rapporteur asked the Experts to enlarge their study in a PanEuropean comparison of all that is happening on "anti-terrorism" legislation in 47 CoE Member Countries, including Russia, Turkey and Azerbaidjan..

Bad lack : "The existing 28 days’ detention without charge in the UK is, in comparison with other CoE member countries, one of the most extreme : In Turkey, the period is 7,5 days, in France 6 days, in Russia 5 days, and in .. the U.S. and Canada just 2 and 1 days respectively", denounced Democrat MEP Ms WOLDSETH from Norway..


"Numerous respected human rights organisations, including Liberty and Human Rights Watch, have expressed serious concern" "The proposed legislation ...could easily lead to extensive abuses. ...Detention for 42 days means six weeks in which one is taken away from one’s family, friends, home and livelihood only to be let off without being charged. That will destroy lives and isolate communities", she added.

- "3 years ago, the UK Government sought to increase the period of pre-charge detention from 14 days to 90 days. Not long before that, it had been only 7 days. There was a vigorous debate ...and a ...compromise was reached of 28 days. We have to ask whether there are proper safeguards in place to extend the period to 42 days. I suggest that there are fatal flaws", reminded British Conservative Clappison.

- "What sort of society holds someone in detention for 42 days and does not have to tell the person who is in prison why they are there, or explain the suspicions that arose and led to their detention? What sort of society believes that that is the way to treat its citizens? That is an appalling injustice, ...A 42-day detention period will not make the UK safer. Instead, it will be the first step to giving in to terrorists; it is saying that we are prepared to sacrifice our democratic rights and the principles for which we have stood for centuries", criticized British Liberal Michael Hanckock


"Comments made ...by Norwegian delegates are unfortunate", replied British Socialist MEP Ms.Curtis-Thomas, accusing them to "besmirch the reputation of our police force, which is one of the Best in the World", as she said, believing that "there are significant safeguards ...to ensure that individuals are not subjected to unlawful detention"


PACE "has serious doubts whether ...the draft legislation are in conformity with the ...case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. A lack of ..safeguards may lead to arbitrariness, resulting in breaches of ... liberty and ...right to a fair trial". PACE "is particularly concerned that: ..the judge ..may not be in a position to examine whether there exist reasonable grounds for suspecting that the arrested person has committed an offence;"; that "... representation by a lawyer may be inappropriately restricted or delayed;" that "information on the grounds for suspicion of a person ...may be unduly withheld.. ;" that this "may give rise to arrests without the intention to charge;", and; in general, that "prolonged detention without proper information on the grounds for arrest may constitute inhuman treatment", says Klaus De Vries' Report, adopted with 29 votes against zero.


Records don't say if it took him 42 Days to draft his Report, but, at least, he knew why...


2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?


SMF Recent Topics SA

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.