Implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
- Author(s):
- Parliamentary Assembly
- Origin
- Assembly
debate on 9 April 2025 (15th sitting) (see Doc. 16134, report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights,
rapporteur: Mr Constantinos Efstathiou). Text
adopted by the Assembly on 9 April 2025 (15th sitting).See
also Recommendation 2295
(2025).
1. The year 2025 will mark the 75th
anniversary of the adoption of the European Convention on Human Rights
(ETS No. 5, the Convention). The Parliamentary Assembly celebrates
the history and extraordinary impact of the system established by
this unique instrument. The Convention and the European Court of
Human Rights (the Court) have helped promote peace across the continent,
which has led to the Court being awarded the Dresden Peace Prize
in January 2025. The Convention and the Court have also helped strengthen democracy
and the rule of law on our continent and create a vast legal space
in which everyone can be protected from human rights violations
and seek redress. To date, the Convention and the Court represent
the most advanced supranational system for the protection of human
rights worldwide.
2. The Assembly reiterates the unequivocal obligation for the
States Parties to the Convention to implement the judgments of the
Court in a timely and effective manner. It further emphasises that
States parties are bound to comply with interim measures indicated
by the Court, as they are essential for ensuring further effective
implementation of judgments.
3. In the Reykjavik Declaration, adopted at the 4th Summit of
Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe (16-17 May
2023), States underlined the fundamental importance of the execution
of the Court’s judgments. They reaffirmed their unwavering commitment
to the Convention system, agreed to redouble their efforts to ensure
the full, effective and rapid implementation of the Court’s judgments
and set out a series of specific steps to help achieve this. The
heads of State and government, recalling that national parliaments
also bear responsibility for complying with the judgments of the
Court, invited the President of the Assembly to strengthen the political
dialogue with national interlocutors in this area.
4. The Assembly welcomes the commitments made at the Reykjavik
Summit, as well as the extensive work done to date to carry out
the steps requested by the heads of State and government.
5. Although the vast majority of the Court’s judgments are implemented,
the Assembly is concerned by the failure of some States to remedy
the underlying causes of human rights violations identified in certain judgments,
as reflected in cases pending implementation which have been classified
by the Committee of Ministers as “leading”. Leading cases usually
highlight a wider human rights problem affecting many people. If reforms
are not carried out to implement such cases, the underlying problem
can persist, causing harm to more individuals. The failure to implement
such judgments can also lead to repetitive applications to the Court, increasing
its workload and harming the efficiency and effectiveness of the
entire Convention system. Looking at the overall number of cases
pending implementation for a State is of limited use in understanding
that State’s compliance with the Convention and the Court’s case
law, as the number of such cases can often be reduced simply by
paying just satisfaction. The number and type of leading cases pending
implementation are important indicators, because they can often
only be implemented by taking the general measures necessary to
resolve underlying human rights problems.
6. There are nine States which have over 40 leading cases pending
implementation: Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, the Republic
of Moldova, Poland, Romania, Türkiye and Ukraine. These States also
have the highest number of leading cases which have been pending
implementation for more than five years, which indicates that human
rights issues are not being resolved within a reasonable period
of time. The Assembly urges these countries in particular to undertake
urgent measures to systematically improve their implementation of
the Court’s judgments.
7. The Assembly realises that the situation in Ukraine is complex
in comparison with other countries because of the Russian war of
aggression and that the implementation of judgments of the Court
faces specific challenges in light of this war. The Assembly welcomes
the fact that, even in such difficult circumstances, the Ukrainian
authorities have stayed firm, have acknowledged and continue to
demonstrate their commitment to full compliance with the Convention
and to undertake a number of measures to solve the structural problems identified
by the Court.
8. The Reykjavik Principles for Democracy, set out in Appendix
III to the 2023 Reykjavik Declaration, reiterate that democracy
is “the only means to ensure that everyone can live in a peaceful,
prosperous and free society”. Council of Europe member States resolved
to “prevent and resist democratic backsliding on [the European]
continent”. A key way in which this can be achieved is through the
implementation of the judgments of the Court, notably those concerning
the protection of freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of
association, the right to free and fair elections and the independence
of the judiciary, as well as judgments highlighting an abusive limitation
of rights and freedoms involving a violation of Article 18 of the
Convention. The Assembly urges States Parties to the Convention
to implement such judgments as a matter of priority.
9. The Assembly considers it absolutely unacceptable that the
judgment in the case of
Kavala v. Turkey, which
was the subject of infringement proceedings under Article 46, paragraph 4,
of the Convention, has not yet been implemented and that Mr Kavala
is still imprisoned. The Assembly refers to its
Resolution 2518 (2023) “Call
for the immediate release of Osman Kavala”, including its conclusion
that the case merits initiation of the complementary joint procedure
foreseen in
Resolution 2319 (2020) “Complementary
joint procedure between the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary
Assembly in response to a serious violation by a member State of
its statutory obligations”. It reiterates its call on Türkiye to
immediately release Mr Kavala, in line with its obligations under
the Convention and the Statute of the Council of Europe (ETS No. 1).
10. The implementation of interstate cases and cases with interstate
features is also a matter of considerable concern. The Assembly
calls on current and former States Parties to the Convention that
are the subject of such judgments to comply with their international
obligations. The Assembly further calls on the member States and
other stakeholders in the Convention system to demonstrate the necessary
political will and commitment to make progress in the implementation
of these cases.
11. In order to urgently strengthen the implementation of the
Court’s judgments, the Assembly calls on States Parties to the Convention
to carry out the measures set out in paragraph 7 of
Resolution 2494 (2023) “Implementation
of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights”.
12. In particular, the Assembly urges States Parties to the Convention
to ensure that effective national co-ordination mechanisms are in
place, with sufficient authority and resources, and participation
from across government, to enable the timely and effective implementation
of the Court’s judgments. The Council of Europe has carried out
a multi-country study to identify best practices that strengthen
domestic capacity for rapid execution of the judgments and decisions
of the Court (carried out under the project Support to Efficient Domestic
Capacity for the Execution of ECtHR [Court] Judgments). The Assembly
urges States parties to use the findings of this study to inform
any changes needed in their own national arrangements, in order
to ensure full and timely implementation of the Court’s judgments.
The Assembly welcomes the establishment of the Execution Co-ordinators
Network in June 2024 and resolves to carry out any joint activities
that the network and the Assembly judge to be constructive.
13. The Assembly also invites national parliaments to play their
role in the execution of the judgments of the Court by implementing
the “Basic principles for parliamentary supervision of international
human rights standards” set out by the Assembly in
Resolution 1823 (2011) “National
parliaments: guarantors of human rights in Europe”. These principles
require the establishment of appropriate parliamentary structures
to ensure rigorous and regular monitoring of compliance with and
supervision of international human rights obligations, such as a
dedicated human rights committee or an analogous structure. The
remit of such structures should include regular examination of the
implementation of the judgments of the Court by the State concerned;
the initiation of legislative changes to ensure compliance with
the Convention and implementation of the Court’s judgments; and
the systematic verification of the compatibility of any draft legislation
with international human rights obligations. It is essential that
such parliamentary structures are provided with sufficient and specialised staff
as well as the necessary resources to carry out these tasks effectively.
14. The Assembly welcomes the contribution that the European Commission
has made in its Rule of Law Reports, which highlights problems with
the implementation of the Court’s judgments. The Assembly invites the
European Commission to more frequently include the implementation
of the Court’s judgments in its lists of recommendations in the
country chapters of Rule of Law Reports, by:
14.1 recommending that States implement particular judgments
which are significant for ensuring the protection of the rule of
law; and/or
14.2 recommending that States improve their overall record
of implementing judgments in leading cases of the Court, in countries
that have a significant problem with the execution of these judgments.
15. The Assembly underlines the continuing obligation of the Russian
Federation to implement the Court’s judgments and welcomes the measures
taken by the Committee of Ministers to continue its supervision
of cases concerning the Russian Federation, in particular via its
contacts with other international organisations, notably the United
Nations. The Assembly resolves to further examine whether additional
steps could be taken to ensure the payment of outstanding just satisfaction
awarded by the Court in these cases, including in particular interstate
cases.
16. The Assembly also resolves to continue and enhance its role
in promoting the full, effective and rapid implementation of the
judgments of the Court, in accordance with the Reykjavik Declaration
and subsequent decisions of the Committee of Ministers. Additional
work initiated since the Reykjavik Declaration includes greater
support for the President of the Assembly to raise the issue of
the implementation of the Court’s judgments in high-level meetings,
as well as briefings for national delegations on the implementation
of the Court’s judgments in their State. Subject to adequate funds,
the Assembly resolves to create a network of parliamentarians to
promote the implementation of judgments of the European Court of
Human Rights. Members of the network could share best practices
on the implementation of judgments within the Assembly and, at the
same time, promote the implementation of judgments domestically
in their own countries, for instance by engaging with relevant national
interlocutors or encouraging legislative and structural reforms.
17. In view of the need to improve implementation of the Court’s
judgments, the Assembly resolves to remain seized of this matter
and to continue to give it priority.
