75th anniversary of the ECHR: the more our fundamental rights are threatened, the more we should defend them
Seventy-five years ago, one of the world’s most protective human rights texts was ratified in Strasbourg. The European Court of Human Rights, established by the Convention, is a model respected worldwide. In the face of the now constant attacks on the Court, Volt calls for its independence to be safeguarded.
The European Convention on Human Rights and the Strasbourg Court protect all Europeans. They guarantee our right to a fair trial by exposing the shortcomings of our judicial systems. They encourage governments to improve the prison systems in our countries. They lead to significant reforms to protect the rule of law and our fundamental rights in Europe.
For many European citizens, the Strasbourg Court is the last resort after exhausting all avenues of appeal in their respective States. Its decisions have notably helped to protect the work of journalists working in the public interest, the political and social rights of minorities, and victims of serious injustices and the arbitrary actions of illiberal states.
Far from being a ‘foreign court’, the ECHR applies and interprets a text signed and ratified by all the founding member states of the Council of Europe on 4 November 1950, and later joined by dozens more committed to a democratic Europe. Its judges are among the continent’s most eminent legal experts. The court has no executive powers, it does not defend its decisions to the general public, it does not negotiate its decisions with anyone: as such, it is up to us, European societies, to defend and protect it.
We regret the way in which the Court has been vilified throughout Europe in recent years, most often for electoral purposes. We are concerned about the statement made by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, a declared Europeanist and former President of the European Council, to The Sunday Times on 26 October, in which he suggested that leaving the Convention would be a ‘reasonable solution’ if renegotiation of the text proved impossible.
We also deplore the fact that, on 29 October, 96 British MEPs voted in favour of Nigel Farage's proposal to leave the Convention.
We are particularly concerned about collective efforts to undermine the Convention, such as the initiative launched in the spring by nine states, including Denmark and Italy, openly criticising the Court's case law.
We reject the idea that fundamental rights are an obstacle to the implementation of effective public policies. On the contrary, we consider that fundamental rights should inform them. We cannot accept politicians and statesmen and women should call into question the independence of the judiciary. We oppose the use of these rights and our judges as scapegoats to justify the failures of our public authorities.
Instead, we call for a broad movement to defend our European judges. The European Convention on Human Rights and the Court are a source of pride for Strasbourg. They must be a source of pride for the entire European continent.