​Statement following the Danish Chairmanship’s High-Level Expert Conference in Kokkedal, Denmark

Respect for the rule of law and human rights requires a strong and independent judiciary shielded frompolitical interference. Better implementation of the Convention at the national level and the full andprompt execution of the European Court of Human Rights (‘the Court’) judgments are at the core ofsecuring the effectiveness and preserving the overall credibility of the Convention system. Furthermore,there can be no doubt that, together with the implementation of the Convention obligations at domesticlevel, the full, consistent and effective execution of judgments remains the most effective way to alleviatethe workload of the Court and thus to preserve its longer-term future. To that end, in 2015 Council ofEurope member states unanimously adopted the Brussels Declaration on the “Implementation of theEuropean Convention on Human Rights, our shared responsibility,” which set out measures to be takenby various stakeholders to improve the execution of the Court’s judgments. In this regard, we regret thatthe renewed discussions taking place, including at Kokkedal, appear to once again focus on the functioningand methods of the Court rather than on meeting existing legal and political commitments on nationalimplementation, including those in the Brussels Declaration. With this in mind, the undersignedorganizations believe that the upcoming proposed Copenhagen Declaration should emphasize:

- The concrete actions required at the national level to prevent and address violations ofConvention rights – in particular measures to remedy systemic and institutional problems - andto implement the Court’s judgments. It is the responsibility of all branches of the state -legislative, executive, and judicial- to take measures within their competence to prevent andaddress Convention violations, including through the execution of judgments of the Court.

- The need for the Committee of Ministers to take more effective action to support and ensurethorough and prompt execution of judgments, through individual and general measures. Thismust include, where appropriate, opening of infringement proceedings under article 46.4 ECHR.There is also a need for the secretariat of the Council of Europe to have increased resources inorder for it to prioritize the implementation.

- The importance of nominating the most- qualified candidates as judges of the Court. One of thecornerstones upon which the Court’s authority is based are the standards and procedures for theselection and appointment of judges. We strongly encourage the Danish Chairmanship to buildon previous Declarations and on the work of the Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH)with a view to strengthening both national and Council of Europe level selection procedures toallow for the best candidates to be elected to the Court.

- That it is a fundamental principle of the rule of law that the Court should be free from politicalinterference. “Enhanced dialogue” between governments and the Court, referred to by theDanish Chairmanship in its stated priorities published on 8 November, should not be pursued atthe expense of the Court’s independence or authority. In particular, we strongly oppose anyproposals aimed at, or which could have the effect of, weakening the Court’s authority and/orundermining its independence such as through creating new channels of communication betweenthe Committee of Ministers and the Court in which discontent from member states with the case-law could be directly expressed. We urge the Chairmanship, indeed all Member States, to refrainfrom any reforms that would place undue pressure on the Court in its interpretation andapplication of the Convention. Any undermining of established jurisprudential principles, such asthe dynamic interpretation of the Convention, must be rejected.

We look forward to engaging with the Danish Chairmanship, and indeed all member states, with a viewto ensuring that the reform process effectively focuses on the actual challenges faced by the EuropeanConvention system, namely member states’ often repetitive non-compliance with the Conventionobligations and the lack of implementation of the Court’s binding judgments.

Open Society Justice Initiative

Amnesty International European Human Rights Advocacy Centre
European Implementation Network
International Commission of Jurists
World Organisation Against Torture