EIN Online Training: Combatting violence against women and domestic violence by supporting implementation of ECtHR judgments

This week, EIN facilitated a new online training to support the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”) concerning violence against women and domestic violence (“VAW/DV”). The training is part of EIN’s project on VAW/DV, which is meant to provide comprehensive support to specialist organisations to ensure that they can effectively contribute to the ECtHR implementation monitoring system.

This online training aims to sensitize expert organisations on the importance of contributing to the implementation of VAW/DV judgments at the Committee of Ministers level and equip them with tools to help them best make use of the supervision process.

The day began with Prof. Başak Çalı, EIN Chair, who outlined the objectives and structure of the training and provided a warm welcome to participants. She was joined by the Deputy Permanent Representative and Government Agent of Luxembourg, David Weis, who stressed the importance of the issue and underlined Luxembourg’s support for the implementation of these judgments.

The first presentation of the day was held by George Stafford, EIN Director, who discussed the benefits of advocating for the implementation of VAW/DV judgments of the ECtHR. Next, Ekaterina Malareva, Lawyer at the Department for the Execution of Judgments, Council of Europe, provided the participants with an overview of how the implementation process works.

Following a short break, participants continued to learn how the implementation process works and asked questions regarding the topic. Violeta Andriuța, Lawyer at the Women’s Law Centre Moldova, presented her own experiences advocating for the implementation the T.M. and C.M. v. Moldova judgment and shared her lessons learned.

After lunch, Agnès Ciccarone, EIN Programme Manager, outlined best practices for NGOs making submissions to the Committee of Ministers. She was followed by Elena Biaggioni, Lawyer at Donne in Rette contro la Violenza, who also shared her invaluable experiences on advocating for the implementation of the Talpis v. Italy judgment, progress made and lessons learnt thus far. The final presentation was held by Ioana Iliescu, EIN Law and Advocacy Officer, who discussed common issues included to date in NGO submissions in domestic violence and violence against women cases, with a particular focus on scope, evidencing and recommendations.

In the last session of the day, participants were divided into break-out groups to discuss specific domestic violence judgments and the best course of action for implementation by applying the day’s training. The break-out groups discussed Tershana v. Albania, Levchuk v. Ukraine and Tkhelidze v. Georgia. The participants discussed break-out group outcomes and upcoming plans to engage with the implementation of ECtHR judgments on VAW/DV. The training concluded with a discussion on EIN’s upcoming report on on the implementation of VAW/DV judgments of the ECtHR.

We thank all those who joined us online, especially those who presented. We also express our gratitude to the Permanent Representation of Luxembourg to the Council of Europe, which supports the project.

Ukraine Civil Society Training: Making ECHR Judgments Lead to Justice

This week, EIN and Netherlands Helsinki Committee held a training workshop and conference for Ukrainian civil society focusing on increasing their capacity to advocate for the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). This training took place on Tuesday 26th and Wednesday 27th October 2021 in Kyiv, Ukraine.

Photo Credit: EIN

The first day of the training was introduced by Antanina Maslyka, Programme Officer at the Netherlands Helsinki Committee. The training was then chaired by EIN Vice-Chair Professor Philip Leach, Director of the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC) and Professor of Human Rights Law at Middlesex University.

The first day focused on the implementation process of ECtHR judgments and Ukraine’s implementation record. George Stafford, EIN Director, discussed the non-implementation challenge and why advocating for the implementation of ECtHR judgments can be a key to making progress in human rights protection in Ukraine. The second presentation of the day was about how NGOs can get involved in the ECtHR implementation process, focusing on the basics of the system. This presentation was given by Olga Dubinska, Legal Officer at the Department for the Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe.

The second day of training focused on how to best advance ECtHR implementation in Ukraine: both domestically and through the Council of Europe. Agnès Ciccarone, EIN Programme Manager, held a presentation on best practices for NGO submissions. Next, Ioana Iliescu, EIN Law and Advocacy Officer, discussed the possibilities of expanding the arsenal of advocacy tools by combining Rule 9 submissions and domestic advocacy, by giving examples of good practices from other states.

Photo Credit: EIN

Next, Mykhailo Tarakhkalo, Strategic Litigation Center Director, Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union (UHHRU), and Hanna Ovdienko, Legal Expert, Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group presented their experiences of work on ECtHR implementation and lessons learned. A roundtable discussion followed the presentation, with participants discussing opportunities and challenges in implementing ECtHR judgments in Ukraine.

The next session looked at possibilities for moving forward by examining individual cases. Three breakout groups were organized on three selected ECtHR cases pending implementation: Shmorgunov and others v. Ukraine, which concerns multiple violations to stop Maidan protests in 2013-2014 and a lack of effective and independent investigations; Ignatov v. Ukraine, which concerns unlawful arrests and detention on remand; and Sedletska v. Ukraine, which concerns disproportionate interference with journalistic sources. During the breakout sessions, the participants brainstormed and applied the training to the selected cases. Participants shared their lessons learned from the brainstorming session and their approach to how to engage with the implementation process. The third session was closed with a final discussion among participants.

Photo Credit: EIN

We thank the Netherlands Helsinki Committee for collaborating with us on this training event and, of course, all participants who joined the training session. We hope to do more of these sessions in person again soon.

For more information on Ukraine’s implementation record, visit our country map here

For information about the NHC, visit their website at https://www.nhc.nl/ and/or follow them on Twitter @NHC_nl, Facebook or LinkedIn, and subscribe to their newsletter.

Turkey Implementation Training with Netherlands Helsinki Committee

Last week, EIN and the Netherlands Helsinki Committee (NHC) hosted a 3-day training workshop on advocating for full and effective implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Turkey. Each day of training focused on three main topics on ECtHR implementation in Turkey. 

The first session was introduced and moderated by EIN Director George Stafford, starting with a discussion session regarding participants’ experiences and training expectations, as well as the basics of the implementation system (based on previously circulated video material on implementation). Following this discussion, three presentations were given, with each presentation concluding with a question-and-answer period for participants to deepen their understanding of the implementation process. The first discussion of the day provided participants with an overview of the ECtHR implementation process.

Ayse Bingol, Co-Director of the Turkey Litigation Support Project, presented how Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) can get involved in the ECtHR implementation process. Ayse specifically outlined what to include in submissions to the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers (CM) and the importance of engaging with the CM. Next, Işık Batmaz, Head of Section at the Department for the Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights presented on best practices for NGO submissions and discussed what mistakes to avoid. The session concluded with George Stafford, Director of the European Implementation Network, who discussed infringement proceedings under Article 46 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and its potential to execute European Court of Human Rights judgments.

The second day of training focused on Turkish NGOs and human rights lawyers experience with engaging in the ECtHR implementation, who shared their own experiences. The session was introduced and moderated by Ayse Bingol, followed by three brief presentations. The first was by Emma Sinclair-Webb, Turkey Director of Human Rights Watch, focused on CM submissions as an advocacy tool. Next, Özlem Zingil, Hafiza Merkezi Turkey (Truth Justice Memory Centre) on forming alliances with other organisations. The final presentation was by Benan Molu, an independent human rights lawyer, on the need for more lawyers to be involved in the implementation process. These presentations gave participants valuable information on ECtHR implementation and lessons learned thus far. The session concluded with a roundtable session on opportunities and challenges in implementing ECtHR judgments in Turkey. 

EIN Director George Stafford introduced and moderated the final training session, which focused on practical discussions on approaching selected cases. This last day of training took the form of three breakout sessions, allowing participants to discuss how they would approach specific ECtHR judgments pending implementation in Turkey. The cases selected concerned the absence of any review mechanism in Turkish legislation for an aggravated life imprisonment sentence (Gurban v. Turkey group); freedom of expression on account of the seizure and confiscation of magazines considered to infringe on public morals (Kaos GL v. Turkey); and the inadequate judicial review of the dismissal of an employee of a public institute, under an emergency legislative decree, on account of his alleged links with a terrorist organisation (Pişkin v. Turkey). The session concluded with presentations from each breakout group explaining their approach to tackling the implementation process of their case, which allowed participants to apply all three days of training.

We thank all moderators and participants for attending the training session, especially NHC, for supporting and collaborating on this training event, as well as the exceptional translators. Thank you all.

 For information about the NHC, visit their website at https://www.nhc.nl/ and/or follow them on Twitter @NHC_nl, Facebook or LinkedIn, and subscribe to their newsletter.