The European Court of Human Rights The European Court of Human Rights The European Court of Human Rights / The European Court of Human Rights The European Court of Human Rights is an international court set up in 1959. It rules on individual or State applications alleging violations of the civil and political rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights. Since 1998 it has sat as a full-time court and individuals can apply to it directly. In almost fifty years the Court has delivered more than 10,000 judgments. These are binding on the countries concerned and have led governments to alter their legislation and administrative practice in a wide range of areas. The Court's case-law makes the Convention a powerful living instrument for meeting new challenges and consolidating the rule of law and democracy in Europe. The Court is based in Strasbourg, in the Human Rights Building designed by the British architect Lord Richard Rogers in 1994 – a building whose image is known worldwide. From here, the Court monitors respect for the human rights of 800 million Europeans in the 47 Council of Europe member States that have ratified the Convention.

How the Court works Registry Article 25 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides that: "The Court shall have a registry, the functions and organisation of which shall be laid down in the Rules of Court." The task of the Registry is to provide legal and administrative support to the Court in the exercise of its judicial functions. It is therefore composed of lawyers, administrative and technical staff and translators. There are currently some 640 staff members of the Registry, 270 lawyers and 370 other support staff (see the Organisation Chart below). Registry staff members are staff members of the Council of Europe, the Court's parent organisation, and are subject to the Council of Europe's Staff Regulations. Approximately half the Registry staff are employed on contracts of unlimited duration and may be expected to pursue a career in the Registry or in other parts of the Council of Europe. They are recruited on the basis of open competitions. All members of the Registry are required to adhere to strict conditions as to their independence and impartiality.The head of the Registry (under the authority of the President of the Court) is the Registrar, who is elected by the Plenary Court (Article 25 (e) of the Convention).

He/She is assisted by one or more Deputy Registrars, likewise elected by the Plenary Court. Each of the Court's five judicial Sections is assisted by a Section Registrar and a Deputy Section Registrar. The principal function of the Registry is to process and prepare for adjudication applications lodged by individuals with the Court. The Registry's lawyers are divided into 31 case-processing divisions, each of which is assisted by an administrative team. The lawyers prepare files and analytical notes for the Judges. They also correspond with the parties on procedural matters. They do not themselves decide cases. Cases are assigned to the different divisions on the basis of knowledge of the language and legal system concerned. The documents prepared by the Registry for the Court are all drafted in one of its two official languages (English and French). In addition to its case-processing divisions, the Registry has divisions dealing with the following sectors of activity: information technology; case-law information and publications; research and the library; just satisfaction; press and public relations; language department and internal administration. It also has a central office, which handles mail, files and archives.

British, Italian and German architects give Europe a face British, Italian and German architects give Europe a face Article published on April 1, 2008 VO From the magazine Article published on April 1, 2008 Openness, transparency, efficiency: which buildings need a democracy? We span the European parliament, palace, court of human rights and Central Bank European parliament: Greece on the Rhine European parliament in Strasbourg (Photo: ©inyucho/ Flickr) The political centre of the European Union stands for architectural innovation: since 1990, the European parliament has assembled in the Louise-Weiss building on the north-eastern border of Strasbourg. The building is named after a French female politician, feminist and European activist from the twenties. Its design is the successful result in the attempt to give European democracy a place to live. The French office Architecture Studio , which won the international competition in 1991, unites the formative style principles of European architecture across 220, 000 square metres of land. The cross and the ellipse dominate the building – the contained classical form and the sweeping lines of the Baroque period.

Externally the parliament’s structure is divided into an arched part of the building with a conference room, where there is also a plenary hall and a tower for the offices of the MEPs. The unfinished, unusual eastern face of the tower is a cause for speculation: is it based on the colisseum in Rome? Or is it a tower of babel facing in an easterly direction? According to the image of Architecture Studio, visitors meet a mainstay of western democracy in the publicly accessible tower: the Greek Agora , the debating square of old Athens. As a counterpart to the plenary hall the round, public square takes up the inside of the office tower. However the former, with its closed off dome, doesn’t emanate anything like the transparency of the glass dome of the Reichstag in Berlin European palace: a knight’s palace with the charm of the seventies European senate in Strasbourg (Photo: ©Kpalion/ Mai2004) You can see immediately that the Louise-Weiss-building is actually a ‘deluxe domicile’ (Süddeutsche Zeitung) for Europe’s representatives just by looking at the European palace that it is a neighbourhood.

In 1977, the square building with its conventional outer structure was made according to plans drawn up by French architect Henry Bernard. In this concept Europe seems less fond of discussion than in the new parliament building: according to Bernard, the face of the 38-metre-high construction should be the embodiment of the strength and unity of the EU. However inside the building Bernard preferred a curvy construction method, showing a free circulation of ideas and opinions. To this day the European palace is the home of the European council . Up until 1999 the parliament met here due to the lack of an alternative building Deliberative: the European court of human rights Architecture model, Strasbourg by Richard Rogers & architects/ Paris exhibition 2008 (Photo: ©dalbera/ Flickr) Goddess Justice holds a pair of scales in her hand. The allegory may have been the inspiration for star architect Richard Rogers , whose Heathrow Terminal 5 has just been unveiled outside London, for his framework of the European court of human rights. At least from a birds-eye view, the circular conference halls in the court building resemble two colossal dishes.

The building was completed in 1995 and forms the ‘magical triangle’ in Strasbourg’s European quarter, along with the Louise-Weiss-Building and the European palace. According to the will of the architect the court, made of steel and a glass façade reflected in the adjoining rivulet, is not meant to be a ‘monument’, but a ‘symbolic landmark’ that Europe can have a ‘credible image’. Rogers, a British architect of Italian origin who won the Pritzker architecture prize in 2007, encompassed the basics of justice in his buildings: transparency and perfect clarity. However the symmetry of the construction has a very prosaic cause in its original administrative structure of the court. Until 1998, the court was also home to the European commission – each one having a home in their own curved dish Big finance: European Central Bank (ECB), Frankfurt am Main Temporary site of the ECB, Frankfurt am Main (Photo: ©Mike from Zurich/ Flickr) In February 2008 the city of Frankfurt-am-Main was awarded planning permission, with work beginning in April.

The eastern border of the main metropolis at the site of the former Great Market Hall will be the site of the European Central Bank . The Austrian architect design firm Coop Himmelb(l)au plans to build an 185-metre-high office tower consisting of a glass atrium and two individual towers twisting amongst each other. This, according to the Viennese architects, is a symbol of ‘transparency, efficiency and stability’ - features of the construction which should also apply to Europe’s currency keepers. Until about 2012, the ECB will stay in the Eurotower in Frankfurt’s town centre, which was altered in the nineties for the ECB. Before building even gets underway though, the planned Skytower is already a problem child. In 1928 the former Great Market Hall was listed under a preservation order, which is why the heirs to architect Martin Elsaesser protested vehemently against the new construction being built. The original proposal of Coop Himmelb(l)au was to fend off the protests. There was meant to be a conference centre in the form of a skyscraper right next to the Great Market Hall.

Skytower - new ECB site (Photo 2006: ©dontworry) Now the latter itself is to be altered to become the conference hall. The demolition of the side of the hall and the construction of a glass cross-bar over the industrial monument are still on the agenda – and is the subject of much discussion in Frankfurt Authors European Court of Human Rights – leave it or change it? | LabourList European Court of Human Rights – leave it or change it? Europe Human Rights If you were to believe the lurid stories in the press, you would think that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Strasbourg was a conspiracy against the United Kingdom; a European Court whose raison d’être was nothing less than to continually interfere and even subvert Britain’s independence. So, Sadiq Khan, Labour’s Shadow Justice Secretary, and I went to Strasbourg to find out for ourselves what the ECtHR was all about and whether its notoriety was well-founded. What did we find? When we went to the Court one of the first things that struck us was the extent of British influence. For a start, the Court is situated adjacent to a street named after Ernest Bevin, a Labour Foreign Secretary.

Bevin, along with Winston Churchill and Maxwell Fyfe, was one of the guiding lights of the European Convention and the ECtHR soon after the Second World War. The futuristic design of the Court is the work of British architect Richard Rogers and the Court has more than its fair share of Brits working there. But, most importantly, Britain is seen in the ECtHR as a country with an exemplary record of upholding human rights. Even though there have been judgements which have, understandably, angered British people, they are the exception not the rule. Indeed, the vast majority of cases which are brought against the UK are either dismissed as invalid or the Court actually finds in favour of the UK. Only 4 countries win more cases than the UK – the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark and Andorra. Because of Britain’s record on human rights, as well as our long and proud record of promoting human rights throughout the world, there is at best puzzlement and at worst incredulity in Strasbourg at the British Government’s hostility to the ECtHR and all it stands for.

For many in Strasbourg, if Britain were to withdraw from the European Convention and the Court, as an increasing number in the Conservative Party now advocate, the implications for upholding human rights throughout the world would be disastrous. It would send a clear message to countries like Russia; that human rights are of little real importance and that it is justifiable to ignore international law if it happens to be inconvenient. To reject the Tories’ insular and indifferent attitude to human rights is not to suggest that the ECtHR does not need to change and improve. The huge backlog of cases and, as a consequence, the length of time it can take for cases to be heard, is a frequent criticism, though recent measures introduced by the Court may help to address this. In my view, a more serious criticism is that the Strasbourg judges are of varying quality and expertise. Although it is inevitable that judges from different countries will have different skills and ranges of expertise, it is unfortunately the case that there are examples of judges being put forward by certain countries for reasons other than their legal expertise, knowledge and experience. The Parliamentary representatives in the Council of Europe do a good job in interviewing the candidates and assessing their suitability but a far more vigorous process needs to be put in place.

There is also a case for the Court’s judges to do more to take into account the differing circumstances of member states’ legal traditions when reaching their judgements. While there is a general awareness of the various legal systems of the 47 countries who are party to the European Convention, such an appreciation should be ingrained and made more central to the Court’s work. For all that, many of the things which incense British people are more to do with administrative failings at the Home Office than the ECtHR. I think for example of the case of Amy Houston. Amy was a 12-year old who was knocked down by a car and killed in 2003. The driver of the car was driving without a license and without insurance and continued to do so after Amy’s death. He was an Iraqi Kurd whose application for asylum had been refused. But because the Home Office made a mistake and didn’t try to deport him immediately, he was able to stay in this country. Despite the facts of this case, it has been quoted on a number of occasions to fuel an anti-human rights and an anti-ECtHR agenda.

Equally, it is important to remember that the vast majority of human rights cases are decided by our courts and not by Strasbourg and it follows that if there are improvements to be made we ought to look closer to home and not simply look to Strasbourg. Of course, many Tories are not interested in reform, either in the UK or Strasbourg. The ascendant Tory right are interested in one thing only – Britain leaving the European Convention on Human Rights. This is in part because they are opposed to all things European, whether it’s the European Union or the Council of Europe. Opposition to the Convention also fits in well with their developing agenda of curtailing individual freedoms and the checks and balances which are cornerstones of our democracy. Undermining human rights is part of the same mind set which is depriving thousands of less well-off people of legal aid, is restricting judicial review and which means that some Tories are now in favour of breaking international law when it suits them. Labour believes the need to defend the basic human rights of all human beings is too important to simply give up on international law.

Instead of looking for scapegoats to hide their own failures, the Government should be putting in the hard graft to work with other countries in reforming the ECtHR. Sadly that looks unlikely to happen, which leaves Labour as the only party capable to achieving the changes needed. Wayne David is Labour MP for Caerphilly and Shadow Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform To report anything from the comment section, please e-mail [email protected] BusyBeeBuzz Thank you Wayne for this excellent blog. My passion for human rights knows no bounds. I want to read more articles like this on LL and I want to hear more Labour MP like Sadiq Khan standing up for the ECtHR, human rights legislation, legal aid, judicial review and opposing closed courts and any legislation which undermines the Rule of Law. Human rights are the only rudder we have in this insane, cruel world. Human Rights building - Architecture Human Rights building Human Rights Building - 20 years anniversary The Human Rights Building, which houses the Court, is 20 years old! It was designed by the British architect, Lord Richard Rogers (2007 Laureate of the Pritzker prize), and inaugurated in 1995.

The anniversary of the building provides an opportunity to take us back to the creation and design of this highly symbolic and emblematic architectural work which is now part of French cultural heritage. It is the subject of an exhibition put on by the Court in September 2015, inaugurated by President Spielmann in the presence, among others, of Gabriella Battaini-Dragoni, the Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe and Ivan Harbour, who developed the design of the Building and is now a partner in the firm of architects Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners. Film - 20th Anniversary - HR Building Speech - Dean Spielmann Speech - Deputy Secretary General - CoE Exhibition - HR Building - Visit of Ivan Harbour Ivan Harbour's lecture (in French only) - Zénith Message from Richard Rogers Amendments to the winning project Construction of the Human Rights Building Around the Human Rights Building The Human Rights Building today What they said about it Building The Court is identifiable across the world by the symbol of the building in which it is housed: the Human Rights Building.

47 judges and about 650 Registry staff work there to ensure respect for the human rights of 820 million Europeans in the 47 member States of the Council of Europe that have ratified the Convention. Human Rights Building (Strasbourg) - CVCE Website Human Rights Building (Strasbourg) Image View of the Human Rights Building on the banks of the River Ill, Strasbourg. The building, designed by the British architect, Richard Rogers, was inaugurated in 1995 to house the European Court of Human Rights. Bulgarian judges trained at the European Court of Human Rights - EEA Grants EEA Grants Results & data Frontpage News 2013 Bulgarian judges trained at the European Court of Human Rights The three Bulgarian judges (from left) Irina Ganeva, Iliyana Baltova and Tsveta Jeliazkova belong to the first group of Bulgarian judges who will have a placement in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Photographer: Council of Europe/Sandro Weltin Bulgarian judges trained at the European Court of Human Rights With support from Norway Grants, three Bulgarian judges currently have the opportunity to work at the European Court of Human Rights for one year.

30.7.2013 Share: The project will contribute to improve Bulgaria’s compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights. “I will be more knowledgeable and confident in my future work when applying the European Convention on Human Rights.” said judge Iliana Baltova. Together with two other colleagues, she started her one year placement at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg in the beginning of July. In total nine Bulgarian judges will benefit from of this unique opportunity of gaining experience and obtaining practical knowledge about the work of the Court. This is the first time Bulgarian judges have been offered this opportunity. After the placement, the judges will share their knowledge as lecturers at the National Institute of Justice in Bulgaria. - Great opportunity “This project is very important for Bulgaria and I am happy for being one of the nine judges selected as successful candidates to be placed at the European Court of Human Rights for one year. It is a great opportunity to transmit the knowledge obtained during this year to my colleagues in Bulgaria. said judge Irina Ganeva. She is a judge in the regional court of the Razgrad district in North-eastern Bulgaria and believes the first-hand information about the practical work of the Court is very useful for the regional courts.

A fairer and more efficient justice system The placement of the nine judges is a part of a Norway Grant programme contributing to judicial capacity building and cooperation as well as improvement of the efficiency of the Bulgarian justice system. Justice and home affairs is one of the main priority areas for the Grants in Bulgaria. The projects under this programme will facilitate judicial reform in Bulgaria in line with European standards, improve primary legal aid for vulnerable groups, especially for Roma people, and contribute to a more independent, transparent and efficient judicial system. The five predefined projects under this programme were recently signed and started implementation in April 2013. Improving the human rights situation The overall aim of the programme is to improve Bulgaria’s compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which Bulgaria became a party to when joining the Council of Europe in 1992. The Convention is the cornerstone for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Europe. The Council of Europe is involved as a partner in this programme and it’s underlying projects. The European Convention of Human Rights is one of the founding treaties of the Council of Europe, and experts from the Council have considerable experience in offering technical assistance to its member states in how to respect human rights.

“This secondment is a great opportunity for me to look at the everyday working routine from a different angle, comparing the practice of the European Court of Human Rights and Bulgarian legislation. On my return, I have the opportunity to launch a discussion with Bulgarian colleagues on the possible review of some legal provisions in the Bulgarian legislation in line with European standards” said judge Tsveta Jeliazkova adding: “Our society still needs some support in transmitting best European practices in certain areas of the judicial reform, and this project is a part of this process.” All three judges agree that this placement will not be enriching only from a professional but also a personal point of view, as working in the international and multicultural environment gives a unique possibility of getting new contacts and broadening a comparative vision of different judicial systems across Europe About the Court The European Court of Human Rights is an international court set up in 1959. It rules on individual or State applications alleging violations of the civil and political rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights. Since 1998 it has sat as a full-time court and individuals can apply to it directly. In almost fifty years the Court has delivered more than 10 000 judgments.

These are binding on the countries concerned and have led governments to alter their legislation and administrative practice in a wide range of areas. The Court’s case-law makes the Convention a powerful living instrument for meeting new challenges and consolidating the rule of law and democracy in Europe. The Court is based in Strasbourg, in the Human Rights Building designed by the British architect Lord Richard Rogers in 1994 – a building whose image is known worldwide. From here, the Court monitors respect for the human rights of 800 million Europeans in the 47 Council of Europe member States that have ratified the Convention. More information about the Court can be found in the “Leaflet “ The Court in Brief” – This article is made with input from and in cooperation with the Council of Europe. Why is the European court of human rights hated by the UK right? | Law | The Guardian European court of human rights Why is the European court of human rights hated by the UK right? Court designed to protect the vulnerable is respected in Europe but despised by many Tories and UK newspapers The European court of human rights in Strasbourg, which was designed by Richard Rogers.

Photograph: AFP/Getty Images Sunday 22 December 2013 17.00 EST First published on Sunday 22 December 2013 17.00 EST Close This article is 3 years old Amiran Natsvlishvili is not complaining about the kidnapping. Nor about the brutal beatings, or the huge ransom his family had to pay for his release. The former managing director of a state car plant in Georgia is not bitter, either, about the accusations of embezzlement and misuse of public funds. No, as his young lawyer argues in a bright, high-ceiling courtroom in Strasbourg, what Natsvlishvili really objects to is that the state lied to him. Locked up for more than four months in the same vile cell as the man who kidnapped and beat him as well as a convicted murderer, when the state finally offered him a deal – cop a plea, pay a fine and you're free – Natsvlishvili was so desperate that he jumped at it. And then he was told he could not appeal.

That is why we are here, says the lawyer to the judges behind the bench at the European court of human rights: this man has plainly been denied the right to a fair trial. Georgia of course denies it, but it is in breach of article 6, paragraph 1 of the European convention on human rights. Along with the European commission in Brussels, the Strasbourg-based ECHR could reasonably lay claim to being one of the most maligned institutions in Britain. ("Hardly surprising, I suppose," quips a senior British court official. "Our name contains the words 'European' and 'human rights'. Not exactly a winning combination.") Conservative MPs have said it is high time for Britain to "quit the jurisdiction" of a "supranational quango". The justice secretary, Chris Grayling, is "reviewing Britain's relationship" with an institution he says has "reached the point where it has lost democratic acceptability". The Daily Mail's view of the European court of human rights. Photograph: Daily Mail Grayling said last week the ECHR did not "make this country a better place".

David Cameron has said the court risks becoming a glorified "small claims court" buried under a mountain of "trivial" claims , and suggested Britain could withdraw from the convention to "keep our country safe". The home secretary, Theresa May, has pledged the party's next manifesto will promise to scrap the Human Rights Act , which makes the convention enforceable in Britain. Former lord chief justice Lord Judge and three other senior British judges have recently backed this stance in high-profile lectures, arguing that by treating the convention as a "living instrument" the ECHR is "undermining democracy". Its judges, rather than parliament, are now making British law, they allege, and parliamentary sovereignty should not be ceded to "a foreign court". But another leading supreme court judge, Lord Mance, last week forcefully defended the ECHR's contribution to British law. Parts of the press have been more outspoken, railing against "meddling, unelected European judges" who are "wrecking British law" and demanding the government "draw a line in the sand to defend British sovereignty" by "defying Europe … and ignoring the rulings of this foreign court". That's not how they see things in Strasbourg.

In the 60 years of its existence, the ECHR has reached well over 10,000 judgments in cases such as that brought by Natsvlishvili, prompting changes to national laws and procedures in nearly 50 countries that have now signed the convention. In the past decade, the court has required Bulgaria to care properly for people with mental and physical disabilities, and Austria to allow same-sex couples to adopt each other's children. It has forced Cyprus to take action against sex trafficking and Moldova to halt state censorship of TV. Its judgments have compelled improvements in Russian prisons, and more effective punishment of domestic violence in Turkey . In France, laws have been passed to protect domestic servants from forced labour, while illegitimate children now have equal rights to inheritance. Britain has been obliged to take greater care of vulnerable prisoners, regulate the monitoring of employees' communications, protect the anonymity of journalists' sources, bring the age of consent for gay people in line with that for heterosexuals and force local councils to observe proper safeguards in evictions.

"It isn't just about the human rights of individuals," says Paul Mahoney, the court's veteran British judge, "it's about the functioning of the rule of law – of democratic institutions – in countries not all of which have, like the UK, enjoyed 300-odd years of democracy and freedom. At the end of the day, it's possible for somebody from a tiny village to come here, take their government to court and get the law changed. That really is a small miracle." Deputy registrar Michael O'Boyle is equally forthright. "For six decades," he says, "this institution has radiated a highly impressive body of case law out to the legal systems of a large number of countries – 47 today. It's an advance in civilisation." So: a "small miracle", an "advance in civilisation", or a meddling foreign body undermining national sovereignty. What is the ECHR? The convention over which the court watches was drafted in the late 1940s, to protect Europeans from abuses piled on them over preceding decades. Britons were prominent in the drafting: without the likes of Ernest Bevin, Winston Churchill and David Maxwell Fyfe, the ECHR would not exist in its current form.

It secures, first and foremost, the right to life, a fair trial, freedom of expression, thought, conscience and religion, but also respect for private and family life and the protection of property. It prohibits torture, degrading treatment, forced labour, unlawful detention and discrimination "in the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms" it guarantees. It has evolved over the years, interpreting those rights in situations its postwar drafters could scarcely have imagined: the day after Natsvlishvili v Georgia came Hamalainen v Finland, the case of a male-to-female transsexual unhappy that because same-sex marriage is forbidden in her country, her new gender could not be fully officially recognised unless she divorced or turned her religious marriage into a civil partnership. The court – not the same as the Luxembourg-based European court of justice, which rules on the application of European Union law – sits in the eastern French (and, historically, occasionally German) city of Strasbourg, in a striking building by the British architect Richard Rogers.

It is open to a startling 800 million people, from Portugal to Siberia, all of whom can apply here if they feel their rights have been violated; equally startlingly, about 70,000 a year do. So it is not, as one senior judge observes, your average court: "Other courts deal with demands in justice – guilty or not guilty. This one deals with demands for justice. Its job is to signal a dysfunction in the rule of law." Down in the mail room, Nigar Shukurova points to an array of teetering piles. Each day, she says, the ECHR receives about 1,600 items of post, from scrappy handwritten letters addressed to the "Office Council Court of Europe" to foot-high dossiers "An den Kanzler des Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte". Perhaps 5% of cases fall at this hurdle: forms are not filled in, or the documentation never arrives. Most go on to be examined by judges, who sit singly to decide if a case is admissible and in committees – including, for the most complex, the 17-judge grand chamber – to examine its merits.

Only 30-odd cases a year get a public hearing; the overwhelming majority, maybe 90%, never get anywhere near that far, thrown out because they do not concern a convention right, or because the applicant has not personally been disadvantaged or exhausted every possible legal avenue at national level. "We have to be a bit brutal," says one senior court official. "We can't afford to be sentimental." This makes for a lot of disappointed people. Across the road from the courthouse, small but determined camps of Kurds and Chechens protest; on the morning of every public hearing, an outraged Romanian pensioner parades up and down with a placard. "You are not a human rights institution," he bellows. "You are corrupt, rotten. From Satan! I want my pension, nothing else. Why have you thrown out my dossier? You have no souls." It's a reminder, says Karen Reid, head of the filtering section – set up in 2011 to speed up the processing of cases – that however ill-founded the case, there is a person behind it. "We've been called a lot of things," Reid says.

"The European committee for the prevention of human rights, scum of the earth … But we've also been asked to legalise cannabis. And declare an independent kingdom of Sussex." The filtering department is steadily helping the institution reduce a backlog – more than 160,000 cases at its peak, in November 2011 – caused by the avalanche that arrived with the collapse of the former eastern bloc. The new system seems to be working: in the first nine months of 2013, the court decided 9% more cases than in the same period last year and cut the backlog by 13%; another two or three years and they hope to have got rid of it altogether."We're getting there," says Erik Fribergh, the registrar, who is in charge of a €67m (£56m) budget and a 650-strong team of lawyers and administrators serving the court's 47 elected judges (one from each country). "We can always do better. But we're making solid, quantifiable progress." Once admitted, cases are prioritised, with those involving people at immediate risk or identifying potential systemic problems at the top of the pile.

Many others resemble each other and raise similar points of law: they are considered together, or tackled through pilot cases. Others, known as WECLs, concern well-established case law and can be dispatched by small committees of judges. By streamlining its work like this, the court's judges delivered nearly 1,100 judgments last year; decisions on admissibility were made on a further 88,000 applications. Some rights, it seems, are more often abused than others. In 2012, nearly a third of violations concerned the right to a fair trial – either because the trial concerned was plainly not fair or, often, because proceedings took too long. A further fifth involved allegations of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment. About 5% concerned the right to life. Russian paratroopers in Chechnya in 1999. Russia violated the right to life during the pre-2006 stage of the conflict in the republic. Photograph: Reuters And some countries' names recur more frequently than others. More than half the cases sent to judges involve just four: Russia, Turkey, Italy and Ukraine .

The same countries – minus Italy, but plus Romania, Poland and Bulgaria – accounted for almost half the violation judgments delivered last year. The court's caseload, in fact, reflects the diverse failings of Europe's various national judicial systems: the vast bulk of the 14,500 cases pending against Italy , for example, concern the inordinate length of Italian judicial proceedings, which can drag on for decades. The same applies to Greece. "This is by far the biggest group of Greek cases," says the court's Greek judge, Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos. "But the most important group concerns the detention of asylum seekers in special centres, often in degrading conditions. That's how the issue of immigration comes before the court and it's a major problem for Greece." Applications from Serbia, which account for 10% of the total, stem mostly from the dissolution of former Yugoslavia: payment of army reservists, access to savings in present-day Bosnia and Herzegovina, pensions in Kosovo. Abu Qatada prepares to board a plane to Jordan at RAF Northolt. The European court's initial blocking of British plans to deport the radical cleric caused uproar in the UK.

Photograph: Getty Images In many former Soviet bloc countries, such as Ukraine, nonenforcement of domestic court decisions is one of the biggest problems: a local court says X must get their pension, and X never does. With more than 20,000 cases pending, Russia is a case apart. "It's a big country," says Olga Chernishova, who heads the Russian case-processing division, "with big issues." Often, perhaps surprisingly, the law itself is not at fault: it's about the facts: "If someone spends a year in pre-trial detention, in a cell with 15 people, with no running water, no fresh air and no exercise – that's a violation." But like officials from most other countries represented here – with the notable exception of Britain – Chernishova acknowledges a "general consensus" in her country, in both the media and among the legal profession, on the value of the court's judgments. Concrete changes in Russian law show the ECHR is making a difference, she says: a compensation system has been introduced for those affected by the non-execution of domestic judgments, a problem that has hurt "perhaps hundreds of thousands of people" in Russia.

There are new laws on prison overcrowding, and the removal of ubiquitous, daylight-obscuring shutters from prison cell windows. Russian courts are working quantifiably faster than they did 10 years ago; and the supreme court has explained to lower courts the difference between fact and opinion, so fewer journalists get banged up for libel. Most tellingly, Chernishova says, Russian constitutional court rulings now routinely make reference to ECHR judgments: "And you really cannot underestimate the importance, the message sent to ordinary people when justice is finally done in cases – police brutality, for example – that domestic courts have delayed, or failed even to consider." Inevitably, there are rulings Russia and other countries find somewhat more difficult to accept. As another judge puts it: "Our judgments tend to fall into two categories. It's either: we don't question your norms, but your system has malfunctioned. Or it's: sorry, we can't accept your norms. States generally accept the first quite readily. They don't much like the second." Nadia Eweida and Max Mosley, who both took cases to the ECHR. She won; he lost.

Photographs: AFP/Getty Images In the past three years, Russia has accounted for half the ECHR's right-to-life violations. The vast majority relate to the pre-2006 "active anti-terrorist phase" of the conflict in Chechnya: disappearances, torture, extrajudicial detention, excessive use of force. Politically, these judgments are hard for the Kremlin to swallow, and it has sometimes simply refused to co-operate. But even here there has been progress: two months ago, Russia finally accepted it used disproportionate force during a three-day artillery assault on a Chechen village that left 18 of the applicant's relatives dead, and failed to investigate. "Now they will sometimes accept even these kind of judgments," Chernishova says. While democracy in Russia clearly has its challenges, she says people there "are telling us all the time that things could be much worse – much worse – without this court". Which, of course, makes the attitude to the ECHR of the British government, and parts of the British press, all the more puzzling. "Actually, it's frankly quite dangerous," says Ineta Ziemele, the court's Latvian judge.

"Coming from one of the court's founding members, it can make other governments, especially perhaps those in countries that may be rather less democratic, less concerned with human rights than the UK – it can comfort them. They can say: 'Britain doesn't accept your judgments; why should we?'" Part of Britain's attitude can be explained simply by a different conception of the law. In continental Europe, judges – guardians of written constitutions – routinely overrule politicians. In the UK, parliament rules: primary legislation cannot be questioned by judges. Partly too, it stems from a few high-profile recent cases that have not gone the government's way: the court's initial refusal, for example, to allow the deportation to Jordan of Abu Qatada, and its insistence that it is wrong to deny all prisoners, in every circumstance, a right to vote. Mainly, though, Britain's current attitude seems to be informed most strongly by the wider problems of its relationship with Europe, and the belief among many Conservatives that loudly defending "British sovereignty" and attacking all things European will not lose them any votes. Essentially, in other words, it is political. But whatever is driving it, Britain's stance is viewed in Strasbourg with alarm.

Other countries have objected, sometimes forcefully, to individual judgments: Spain erupted last month when the ECHR ruled Madrid was wrong – as many legal experts had warned it – to apply retroactively a new law requiring prisoners serving long sentences to do the maximum 30 years. That judgment prompted the release of, among others, a Basque separatist bomber – and howls of outrage from the press and some politicians. But unlike David Cameron, Spain's prime minister, Mariano Rajoy, conceded that while he found the ruling "unjust and wrong", he had no choice but to comply. Only Britain objects so strongly to a small number of ECHR rulings that it is contemplating pulling out of the convention altogether – and engaging at the same time in what many in Strasbourg, including senior British officials, see as a deliberate and often dishonest campaign against the court. Last month, for the first time, the ECHR publicly expressed its concern about "frequent misrepresentation" and "seriously misleading" British press reports of its activities. Clare Ovey, head of the UK case-processing division, points out that of the 2,082 complaints against the UK dealt with last year, the court rejected 2,047 as inadmissible.

It found no violation in 23, and upheld 12 – just 0.6% of the total. Of the 2,500-odd potentially admissible cases pending against the UK, she adds, nearly 2,300 concern prisoners' voting rights (the remainder mainly involve the undue retention of DNA samples and criminal records data, expulsion cases, notably to Iraq, and complaints about indeterminate sentences). True, a relatively high proportion of UK applications are by people convicted of a crime, but that's "mainly because Britain is an advanced democracy, where fundamental rights are largely respected. Other countries are not so lucky; there, this court plays a huge role in simply ensuring the rule of law is applied." And whatever impression British newspapers may create, UK cases are not confined to criminals and terrorists: former Formula One boss Max Mosley saw his privacy complaint rejected; BA employee Nadia Eweida, who wanted to wear her crucifix at work, went home happy. "This court has made so many positive UK judgments," says Ovey.

"On press freedom, surveillance, deaths in police custody, admission of evidence, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights, corporal punishment in schools, protection of children … It is worrying, when you see that it is so misrepresented." The court's determinedly anglophile president, Luxembourg judge Dean Spielmann, is diplomatic but plainly concerned. Far from exporting European values to Britain, he points out, the court has helped import British values to Europe. "The right to be assisted by a lawyer at the first police interview, for example," he says. "That's a well-established principle in UK law, now widely accepted." Talk of withdrawing from the convention undermines "those who seek to improve human rights elsewhere in the world" and could pose real problems in British courts that today make "extensive and absolutely exemplary" use of ECHR case law in their own findings. Official after official stresses that the European court of human rights does not "dictate" how governments should implement decisions. Rather, judgments invite states to find solutions to situations collectively deemed unacceptable. "We are," says Spielmann, "really extremely sensitive. We realise every country is different.

We don't say what states must do; we accept they each need the widest possible margin of appreciation to implement judgments." What the court does say, though, is – for example – that a blanket voting ban on every single prisoner is not consistent with the convention by which Britain is bound (a view a parliamentary joint committee emphatically endorsed last week, saying the government had failed to advance a "plausible case" for maintaining the ban and the arguments for lifting it were "on any rational assessment, persuasive".) But other countries mostly take the rough with the smooth: there is a wider good. So he regrets Britain's current "exceptional" position.

"It flies in the face of our shared responsibility," he says, "this joint effort to set – and to uphold – certain minimum standards for human rights, across a continent." Justice secretary finalising plans to curtail Strasbourg court after 2015 to 'ensure UK court judgments are final' Published: 30 Dec 2013 Labour MP says countries such as Ukraine justifying breaches of human rights by citing British government's view Published: 28 Dec 2013 Editorial: In their long retreat into scepticism towards the wider European idea, the Conservatives now seem ready to risk undermining public support for the principles of human rights Published: 22 Dec 2013 Chris Grayling attacks European court of justice and human rights court in Strasbourg, saying they have lost popular support Published: 18 Dec 2013 Art and architecture of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg by Council of Europe Conseil de l'Europe - issuu issuu Issuu on Google+ The Council of Europe 47 member states Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany

, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, ”The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom.

The prestigious architecture and artwork presented in this guide are emblematic of the cultural diversity which both defines the Council of Europe and empowers it. The Council, established in 1949, is dedicated to the promotion of democracy, human rights and the rule of law in its 47 member states and among its 800 million citizens. It works to provide practical solutions to the social, cultural and legal challenges in its member states, regularly reviewing its strategies in order to meet Europe’s changing needs. Location map A cultural guide The buildings 1 Palais de l'Europe 2 Human Rights Building 3 Agora 4 European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines and HealthCare (EDQM) 5 European Audiovisual Observatory 6 Former Human Rights Building 7 European Youth Centre The Council of Europe, a seat and symbol of international democracy, is part of Strasbourg’s rich artistic and architectural landscape. Its buildings and artwork contribute to a fascinating and inspiring history of craftsmanship and design that dates from medieval times to the present day.

qu BUS 5 Council of Europe Avenue de l’Europe F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex Tél : +33 (0)3 88 41 20 00 Fax : +33 (0)3 88 41 27 81 de Line E Droits de l'Homme qu Bus lines 6-30-72 Palais de l'Europe 3 Ja op ur l'E Orangerie Park The works of art 1 Human rights 2 Europe 3 Four-Leaved Clover 4 Statue of Poseidon 5 "Aux victimes de la faim" 6 Auschwitz Memorial 7 Interpenetration 8 The Berlin Wall (portion) 9 The Petrified Seven More information on the Council of Europe is available at Edited by the Public Relations Division in cooperation with the Directorate of Logistics Graphic design: insécable, Strasbourg © Photos: Council of Europe January 2009 Art and architecture of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg This heritage is at the heart of the city’s prestigious international stature.

The following buildings and works of art can be viewed during a visit to the European quarter around the Palais de l’Europe, close to the Orangerie park. A European welcome A row of flagpoles proudly flying the national colours of the 47 Council of Europe member states greets visitors to the Palais de l’Europe. Moving up the steps towards the entrance, the famous European flag, with its circle of 12 gold stars against a vivid blue background, provides a harmonious welcome to one of the Council’s key buildings. * Buildings forming part of the City of Strasbourg’s renowned modern architecture The buildings... European Youth Centre* Agora The Palais de l’Europe* Designed by French architect Henry Bernard and inaugurated in 1977, the Palais de l’Europe is the Council of Europe’s principal building. With its entrance flanked by the flags of all the Council’s member states, the structure of the Palais – a solid, fortress-like exterior which contrasts with its gentler and more fluid curved interior – reflects the values of strength in unity, trust, and cordiality that define the work carried out within its walls.

The outer layer of the Palais is a strong mixture of red, silver and golden-brown colours, which are found on the concrete of the buttresses, the aluminium-covered façade and the vast windows of the conference rooms respectively. In front of the Palais a gently sloping lawn sweeps down from its main steps. Once the site of the predecessor to the Palais de l’Europe – the Maison de l’Europe – this swathe of green land is home to several works of art which have been presented to the Council of Europe. ... and the works of art Human Rights Human Rights by artist Mariano González Beltrán, one of the most important sculptors of his generation, stands on the front lawn of the Palais de l’Europe. The bronze statue, a gift from Spain, presents a circle of male and female figures linked together and is emblematic of human rights and a society living in harmony.

The combination of the abstract (the silhouettes) and the figurative (the expressive faces of the women and the child) evoke gestation, creation and development, the circle of life and all that we have in common, portraying what is meant by the fight for human rights and all of the Council of Europe’s work in this field. Agora is the Council of Europe’s newest building, taking its name from the ancient Greek word for an open place of assembly. It was inaugurated in April 2008 and designed by the architectural firms Art & Build (Brussels) and Denu et Paradon (Strasbourg). Voted the best office building of the year in 2008 (MIPIM award), the Agora combines modernity, efficiency and respect for the environment. Behind its large glazed facade are two atria, which are enclosed by meeting rooms clad in pre-patinaed copper. Covering this structure is an eye-catching cantilevered metal roof, which is topped by two fabric solar chimneys, shaped to allow natural ventilation of the atria. This progressive building bears witness to the Council of Europe’s commitment to environmental responsibility.

European Audiovisual Observatory European Directorate for the quality of Medicines and HealthCare (EDQM) The new building of the EDQM sits to the rear of the Agora. Designed by architects from the Brussels-based firm Art & Build and the Strasbourg-based Denu and Paradon, it was inaugurated in March 2007. The curved glass and wooden structure combines a modern aesthetic with contemporary functionality and houses laboratories, offices and meeting rooms that serve the organisation’s expanding role in monitoring the quality of medicines in Europe and further afield. The European Audiovisual Observatory, a centre for the development of the European film and television sector, can be found close to the bottom of the Palais de l’Europe lawn on the allée de la Robertsau. The Observatory, created in 1992, is housed in the remarkable Villa Schutzenberger, which dates from 1889. Designed by Julius Berninger and Henri-Gustave Krafft at the end of the 19th century, this building is among the finest examples of Art nouveau architecture in Strasbourg.

The house has a distinct southern European character, blending aspects of an Italian villa, including a low-level, overlapping roof, with sculptured decoration and strong, pure lines of Savonnières stone. Beautiful wrought ironwork adds to its grandeur. Designed by the Norwegian architects Lund and Slaatto, this functional, contemporary building has received tens of thousands of young people from all backgrounds since 1972. It is located in the Wacken neighbourhood. The European Youth Centre, an outstanding example of Scandinavian architecture, blends the rawness of concrete and aluminium to striking effect. Former Human Rights Building* The former building of Human Rights, which stands on the edge of the Orangerie Park, was built by architects B Monnet and J Aprill in 1965. A low, square building, its design is typical of its time. The once futuristic jutting rectangles of concrete hold within them a peaceful enclosed courtyard, which is visible from the structure’s southern side. Human Rights Building* Inaugurated in 1995, the Human Rights Building curves alongside the Ill, the river that flows through Strasbourg.

It is one of the most striking achievements of the great British architect Lord Richard Rogers, who also designed the Centre Georges-Pompidou, London’s Millennium Dome, and the Welsh National Assembly building. Situated across the water from the European Union’s Louise Weiss European Parliament building, the design of the Human Rights Building is true to Lord Rogers’ functional and modernist style. Steeped in symbolism (the façade evokes the scales of justice), its contemporary materials (the liberal use of glass is a metaphor for transparency) are used to striking effect. The front of the Human Rights Building is formed by the two cylindrical chambers of the European Court of Human Rights. These two towering structures link the main sections of the building: public spaces comprising intricate circular elements of metal, glass and Vosges sandstone and a simple and more sober office area. A prestigious collection to be discovered in the grounds of our buildings Europe Rudolf Kedl’s electrolysed copper sculpture Europe, presented by Austria, sits on the front lawn of the Palais de l’Europe, next to Beltran’s Human Rights. The 20th century Austrian sculptor described his vertical piece as “a female silhouette arising from the flames”.

Four-Leaved Clover The Four-Leaved Clover, the work of Italian Attilio Pierelli and donated by Italy, can be found on the side of the Palais de l’Europe’s front lawn, adjacent to the sculptures by Cavallini and Beltran. This angular and metallic piece, made of burnished chrome, stands at two metres tall. Statue of Poseidon Poseidon, the Greek god of the sea, addresses the main lawn of the Palais de l’Europe from the north-west. Standing astride his plinth, this mythological character points the way to the building’s grand entrance. The reproduction of the sculpture, dating from around 450 BC, was presented to the Council by Greece in 1998. “Aux victimes de la faim“ The Aux victimes de la faim (To the victims of poverty) memorial is dedicated to the fight against social exclusion and poverty in Europe. The stone was presented to the Council in 1987 by ATD Fourth World, the non-governmental organisation created by ­Father Joseph Wresinski.

Auschwitz Memorial The Auschwitz Memorial, which meets visitors to the Palais de l’Europe as they ascend the main steps, is a symbol of the Council of Europe’s Holocaust Remembrance Day. This simple stone work was unveiled in 2005 by Jean Samuel, an Auschwitz survivor, and Szewach Weiss, then chairman of the Yad Vashem Council and former Speaker of the Knesset. Interpenetration Belgian artist Lucien Wercollier’s Interpenetration sculpture, a donation from Luxembourg, is a simple and elegant polished bronze piece that combines curves and straight lines. The Berlin Wall On the front lawn of the Human Rights Building lies a small portion of the Berlin Wall, donated by Germany in 1989. The historic slabs of concrete, a testament to the vicissitudes of the second half of the 20th century, symbolise German reunification and the hope of all Europeans. The Petrified Seven The Petrified Seven, a sculpture by artist Carl Bucher, lies to the rear of the Human Rights building. Created in 1995, it was presented to the Council of Europe by Switzerland.

An expression of the trauma of physical and mental violence, this haunting piece of art symbolises the Council of Europe’s essential role in protecting human rights, democracy and the rule of law. All pages: Strasbourg – Council of Europe Headquarters HQ Strasbourg / Strasbourg – Council of Europe Headquarters Based in the beautiful city of Strasbourg, France, right next to the European Parliament, the Council of Europe headquarters forms the hub of our operations. In the heart of the European Quarter of Strasbourg, the headquarters is in fact a complex of 6 main buildings, with over 2000 staff. Onsite, there are plenty of facilities to help provide staff with an excellent working environment. You can find 5 restaurants, 3 cafés, a newsagent, a bank, a post office, and a squash court. Right next to le Palais is the beautiful Orangerie park, an ideal place to take a walk, or have a picnic. As well as impressive architecture, the Council of Europe headquarters is also home to some prestigious art works , donated by member states.

Palais de l'Europe Designed by French architect Henry Bernard and inaugurated in 1977, the Palais de l'Europe is the Council of Europe's principal building. With its entrance flanked by the flags of all the Council's member states, the structure of the Palais – a solid, fortress-like exterior which contrasts with its gentler and more fluid curved interior – reflects the values of strength in unity, trust, and cordiality that define the work carried out within its walls. The outer layer of the Palais is a strong mixture of red, silver and golden-brown colours, which are found on the concrete of the buttresses, the aluminium-covered façade and the vast windows of the conference rooms respectively. In front of the Palais a gently sloping lawn sweeps down from its main steps. Once the site of the predecessor to the Palais de l'Europe – the Maison de l'Europe – this swathe of green land is home to several works of art which have been presented to the Council of Europe. Agora Agora is the Council of Europe's newest building, taking its name from the ancient Greek word for an open place of assembly.

It was inaugurated in April 2008 and designed by the architectural firms Art & Build (Brussels) and Denu et Paradon (Strasbourg). Voted the best office building of the year in 2008 (MIPIM award), the Agora combines modernity, efficiency and respect for the environment. Behind its large glazed facade are two atria, which are enclosed by meeting rooms clad in pre-patinated copper. Covering this structure is an eye-catching cantilevered metal roof, which is topped by two fabric solar chimneys, shaped to allow natural ventilation of the atria. This progressive building bears witness to the Council of Europe's commitment to environmental responsibility. European Court of Human Rights Inaugurated in 1995, the Human Rights Building curves alongside the Ill, the river that flows through Strasbourg. It is one of the most striking achievements of the great British architect Lord Richard Rogers, who also designed the Centre Georges-Pompidou, London's Millennium Dome, and the Welsh National Assembly building. Situated across the water from the European Union's Louise Weiss European Parliament building, the design of the Human Rights Building is true to Lord Rogers' functional and modernist style.

Steeped in symbolism (the façade evokes the scales of justice), its contemporary materials (the liberal use of glass is a metaphor for transparency) are used to striking effect. The front of the Human Rights Building is formed by the two cylindrical chambers of the European Court of Human Rights. These two towering structures link the main sections of the building: public spaces comprising intricate circular elements of metal, glass and Vosges sandstone and a simple and more sober office area. EDQM The new building of the European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines & HealthCare sits to the rear of the Agora. Designed by architects from the Brussels-based firm Art & Build and the Strasbourg-based Denu and Paradon, it was inaugurated in March 2007. The curved glass and wooden structure combines a modern aesthetic with contemporary functionality and houses laboratories, offices and meeting rooms that serve the organisation's expanding role in monitoring the quality of medicines in Europe and further afield. European Youth Centre Designed by the Norwegian architects Lund and Slaatto, this functional, contemporary building has received tens of thousands of young people from all backgrounds since 1972. It is located in the Wacken neighbourhood.

The European Youth Centre, an outstanding example of Scandinavian architecture, blends the rawness of concrete and aluminium to striking effect. European Audiovisual Observatory The European Audiovisual Observatory's headquarters are situated in the beautiful art nouveau Villa Schutzenberger on Strasbourg's Allée de la Robertsau, the main axis leading to the Council of Europe. Built in 1900 by the architects Berninger and Krafft, the Villa Schutzenberger is one of the finest examples of art nouveau architecture in Strasbourg. The details of its internal and external architecture have been closely associated to the identity of the Observatory ever since it took up working residence in this magnificent building in 1992. The Villa was kindly made available to the Observatory by the City of Strasbourg. Job Alerts

Question: Which British architect designed the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg?
Answer: RICHARD ROGERS