EIN Publications: Guides & Reports
Justice Delayed and Justice Denied: Report on the Non-Implementation of European Judgments and the Rule of Law
The European Implementation Network (EIN) and Democracy Reporting International (DRI) are delighted to present the third edition of our flagship report “Justice Delayed and Justice Denied: Non-Implementation of European Courts’ Judgments and the Rule of Law,” a joint report on the non-implementation of European Court judgments in EU states.
A Systemic Rule of Law Problem in the European Union
The non-implementation of European courts' rulings by EU member states, which has long been growing into a systemic problem, is now unequivocally recognised as a rule of law matter. Non-implementation undermines the authority and effectiveness of both the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The EU member states are bound by the rulings of these courts. Yet, national authorities fail to make their laws and practices consistent with the European Convention on Human Rights and EU law requirements respectively.
Implementation Delays Lead to Human Rights Infringements
Significant gains for the upholding of democratic principles and the rule of law provenly result from effectively implementing the European Courts’ rulings. That notwithstanding, governments' responses to the non-implementation crisis fall short of expectations, often ranging from sluggishness in following the European Courts’ guidance to active resistance thereto and extreme attempts to undermine these courts’ authority. These delays in implementing judgments lead to prolonged rule of law and human rights infringements and have far-reaching consequences for individuals who are denied timely justice.
The European Implementation Network (EIN) and Democracy Reporting International (DRI) are delighted to present “Justice Delayed and Justice Denied: Non-Implementation of European Courts’ Judgments and the Rule of Law,” a joint report on the non-implementation of European Court judgments in EU states.
The attacks on fundamental European values in recent years has continued to raise concern for European stakeholders – governments, the media, and citizens alike. The EU has introduced a series of policy measures designed to halt and reverse this phenomenon, ranging from the new annual rule of law review cycle, to targeted measures, such as withholding structural funds from countries with severe infringements of the rule of law.
News Publications on the report here
Domestic and gender-based violence is a common and widespread problem across the Council of Europe region and beyond. Globally, 30% of women aged 15 and older have been subjected to physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence, non-partner sexual violence, or both at least once in their lifetime.
We highlight the value of the European Court of Human Rights judgments, and the potential that pending cases have in pushing governments to carry out wide-ranging reforms to combat and prevent domestic and gender-based violence. However, the judgments are only the beginning of the road to justice – they require implementation at the national level for rights to become a reality. Implementing human rights judgments requires individual measures, providing justice for the victim, and general measures requiring reforms in law/practices that prevent similar violations from recurring. Reforms to implement general measures are essential to address the factors contributing to the perpetuation of domestic and gender-based violence.
News publication on the report here
New Joint Report: Justice Delayed and Justice Denied - Non-Implementation of European Courts’ Judgments and the Rule of Law
The European Implementation Network (EIN) and Democracy Reporting International (DRI) are delighted to present “Justice Delayed and Justice Denied: Non-Implementation of European Courts’ Judgments and the Rule of Law,” a joint report on the non-implementation of European Court judgments in EU states.
The EU’s response to the rise of democratic and rule of law backsliding is at an important stage of development. This is a key time to ensure that it is as effective as possible. We hope that this report will help put the implementation of European Courts’ judgments firmly inside the EU’s rule of law agenda, to be seen as an essential requirement of all European states.
News publication on the report here
EIN has produced a new resource on how NGOs can report on the implementation record of their country, to encourage governments to engage positively with the implementation process. Putting relevant government authorities face to face with data that accurately reflect their implementation record is the primary starting point for holding them accountable.
Download Full Document here:
Creating a national “implementation hub” can help share the burden of implementation work. Implementation hubs carry out a wide range of activities to improve the engagement of civil society with the implementation of ECtHR judgments, as well as improve the authorities’ approach to ECtHR implementation as a whole.
The purpose of this short guide is to show how civil society organisations across Europe are inspiring action on implementation in their particular countries. We hope it will provide further inspiration to the growing number of organisations that are working to turn ECtHR judgments into rights.
Download Full Document here:
Country Reports (2020)
EIN launched a series of six country reports on the state of implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.
Guide for Civil Society on Domestic Advocacy for Implementation of ECtHR judgments (May 2020)
Discover the new EIN guide on Domestic Advocacy for the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.
The examples compiled in this guide show that, where NGOs have sought, identified and pursued opportunities for engaging with the authorities, where they have formed alliances with other civil society actors and used the media to drive implementation forward, they have managed to secure important human rights gains.
We hope that civil society actors in Europe will draw inspiration from the best practices and lessons learned presented in this toolkit. Because the conditions for effective implementation vary from country to country, from time to time and even from case to case, this guide does not provide a blueprint, one-size-fits-all approach to domestic advocacy for judgment implementation. Instead, it is conceived as a ‘menu’ of potential strategies, tools and actions that NGOs may take at the national level to push for the execution of judgments. The readers are encouraged to pick and choose those elements of this guide that are most relevant to them.
This guide is also very much a ‘living document’. It seeks to spark a wider conversation among civil society about how to use advocacy at the domestic level to push for the implementation of judgments. We therefore warmly invite our readers to send us feedback, and share their own experiences with domestic advocacy for the implementation of Strasbourg Court judgments with us. So please get in touch!
Checklist on How to Set up an Effective Domestic Advocacy Strategy for the Implementation of ECtHR Judgments
Thanks to the help of Gentium, the Checklist for civil society on How to set up an effective domestic advocacy strategy for the implementation of ECtHR judgments, which is included in the Guide, was translated into Spanish.
EIN Guide: How to write a Rule 9.2? (December 2019)
EIN has produced a concise guide to help NGOs and NHRIs engage effectively in the Committee of Ministers’ supervision of the execution of Strasbourg Court judgments by means of Rule 9s. It explains that implementation is a dialogue, and sets out how NGOs and NHRIs can add their voice to this dialogue.
The guide also features a handy template for a Rule 9 submission, which you may want to use to structure your own submission. This is a “living document” and will be updated as needed. It should be read in conjunction with the EIN Handbook about implementation of ECtHR judgments (see below). Please share your experience using this guide by giving feedback on anything in it that could be improved.
To use the template for Rule 9 submissions, you can also download the document in Word format here. This Guide now exists in French, Romanian and Azerbaijani. We would like to thank our member in Romania, APADOR-CH, for co-ordinating the translation work into Romanian, and Emin Aslan for his translation of the document in Azerbaijani.
EIN Guidance on How to Advocate for the Implementation of ‘Standard Cases’ (October 2019)
EIN has compiled input received overtime on how to push for the implementation of ‘standard cases’. The result is a guide including useful tips on how to run effective advocacy efforts for the implementation of these cases.
Assessing the impact achieved through NGO engagement with the Council of Europe’s judgment execution process in three cases on the rights of LGBTI persons, by Nigel Warner, EIN Board member and former ILGA-Europe adviser (February 2020)
Since 2009 the Council of Europe (CoE) has made specific provision for engagement by NGOs in its process for ensuring implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the impact that such engagement can achieve with a view to encouraging further NGO involvement. It does this by analysing developments in the implementation of three cases in the field of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI).