The ECtHR: European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg – administering the EConvHR: European Convention on Human Rights – and set up by the *Council of Europe* has a Registry just up the road from the Parliament Building of the EU which also has a *European Council* and Commission.
The ECJ in Luxembourg has also reportedly pledged, in its rulings, to be mindful and heedful of Convention rights.
It may be no surprise that EU law students in the British Isles and UK journalists are totally confused.
With the expansion of the EU to embrace Convention member-states, prospectively Turkey, Moldavia a.k.a. Moldava and the Ukraine, I wonder what the rationale is for keeping both ECJ and ECtHR institutions.
Well, I don’t think The Sun would mention the Council or the European Council.
Who would decide to remove the ECtHR unless the member countries (47) were identical to EU Member States? Quite apart from the fact that being mindful of Convention rights is not the same as enforcing them (or attempting to enforce them).
Have I posted this clickable diagram before? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Europe
I agree with your point about the non-mention of the EU Council vs. Council of Europe, unsure the Sun would not fall into the spelling trap of one translator who claims on a Translators’ Forum to have done translations for the ‘Counsel of Europe’.
Also with the ECJ non-enforcement point.
As for the removal of the ECtHT, if the EU expanded to exactly the same 47 member states as the EConHR member states, then the momentum for abolition of the EctHR, rather than of the ECJ, or at least for a rethink – perhaps for a merger with the ECJ – would be bound to build up.
Thanks for the website with clickable diagram I can’t see has been posted before.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.