Abstract The year 2020 brought the second advisory opinion under Protocol No. 16 of the Convention. The Grand Chamber dealt in a number of cases with core democratic values and harshly criticized in Selahattin Demirtaş the Turkish domestic authorities’ behavior towards oppositional politicians. Furthermore, it rendered for the first time a decision in an inter-State case between active EU members. In relation to Article 8 of the Convention, the Court emphasized that certain conditions trigger States’ positive obligations to provide access to safe drinking water.
Leading Cases in the European Court of Human Rights’ Jurisprudence 2020
AufsätzeAndreas Th. Müller , Theresa M. Weiskopf**Univ.-Prof. MMag. Dr. Andreas Th. Müller, LL.M. (Yale), andreas.mueller@uibk.ac.at ; Mag. Theresa M. Weiskopf, theresa.weiskopf@uibk.ac.at ; both: Department of European Law and Public International Law, Innrain 52, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.ZÖR 2021, 1371 Heft 4 v. 22.12.2021
Inhalt
- I. Introduction
- II. Article 1 of the Convention: Admissibility ratione loci: The M.N. and others v Belgium Case
- III. Article 2 of the Convention: Positive Obligations: The Case of Makuchyan and Minasyan v Azerbaijan and Hungary
- IV. Article 3 of the Convention
- V. Article 4 of the Convention: Human Trafficking and Forced Labor: The S.M. v Croatia Case
- VI. Article 5 of the Convention
- VII. Article 6 of the Convention
- VIII. Article 7 of the Convention: Foreseeability of a Criminal Conviction: The Baldassi and others v France Case
- IX. Article 8 of the Convention
- X. Article 10 of the Convention
- XI. Article 13 of the Convention: Effective Remedy: The Case of Mugemangango v Belgium
- XII. Article 14 of the Convention
- XIII. Article 18 of the Convention: Misuse of Restrictions in Rights: The Selahattin Demirtaş v Turkey (No. 2) Case
- XIV. Article 33 of the Convention: Inter-State Application: The Case of Slovenia v Croatia
- XV. Article 34 of the Convention: Victim Status: The Albert and others v Hungary Case
- XVI. Article 41 of the Convention: Just Satisfaction: The Case of Molla Sali v Greece
- XVII. Article 3 Protocol No. 1 of the Convention: The Mugemangango v Belgium Case
- XVIII. Article 4 Protocol No. 4 of the Convention: The Case of N.D. and N.T. v Spain
- XIX. Article 1 Protocol No. 7 of the Convention: The Muhammad and Muhammad v Romania Case
- XX. Article 1 Protocol No. 12 of the Convention: Discrimination on Grounds of Pregnancy: The Case of Napotnik v Romania
- XXI. Article 1 of Protocol No. 16 of the Convention: Advisory Opinion requested by the Armenian Constitutional Court
- XXII. Concluding Remarks
- References
