Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 40kWORD 9k
16 April 2020
Question for written answer  E-002327/2020/rev.1
to the Council
Rule 138
Maximilian Krah (ID)
 Answer in writing 
 Subject: ECLJ report on instances of collusion at the ECHR

The report by the European Center for Law and Justice (ECLJ) NGO entitled ‘NGOs and the Judges of the ECHR’ reveals that at least 22 of the 100 permanent judges at the ECHR between 2009 and 2019 were representatives or members of seven NGOs which are active at the Court.

The Open Society NGO stands out for the number of judges linked with it (12) and for the fact that it funds the other six organisations identified in the report.

It seems that these NGOs have been involved in 185 cases since 2009. 19 judges had a conflict of interest in 88 of the judgments concerned, since the NGOs they had formerly worked for were involved in the cases on which they were serving.

The report also shows that there is no procedure to abstain from sitting at the Court, as those concerned are not informed of the compositions of the panels, and judges are not compelled to inform the President if their objective impartiality might be open to question.

Is the EU’s participation in the system of the European Convention on Human Rights still viable under these circumstances?

Original language of question: DE
Last updated: 10 November 2020Legal notice - Privacy policy