Editing European Court of Human Rights (section)

==Relationship with other courts==

===European Court of Justice===
{{Main|Relationship between the European Court of Justice and European Court of Human Rights}}

The [[Court of Justice of the European Union]] (CJEU) is not institutionally related to the European Court of Human Rights: the two courts are related to distinct organizations. However, since all [[EU States|EU states]] are members of the Council of Europe and so are parties of the Convention on Human Rights, there are concerns about consistency in case law between the two courts. The CJEU refers to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and treats the Convention on Human Rights as if it were part of the EU's legal system<ref>{{Cite web|title=StackPath|url=https://www.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/r26759.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/r26759.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|access-date=2021-06-05|website=www.corteidh.or.cr}}</ref> since it forms part of the legal principles of the EU member states.

Even though its member states are party to the convention, the European Union itself is not a party, as it did not have competence to become one under previous treaties. However, EU institutions are bound under Article 6 of the EU Treaty of Nice to respect human rights under the convention. Furthermore, since the Treaty of Lisbon took effect on 1 December 2009, the EU is expected to sign the convention. That would mean that the Court of Justice is bound by the judicial precedents of the Court of Human Rights' case law and so is subject to its human rights law, which would avoid issues of conflicting case law between these two courts.{{cn|date=September 2021}} In December 2014, the CJEU released [[Opinion 2/13]] rejecting accession to the Convention.<ref>{{cite book|last=Brummer|first=Klaus|title=Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte|year=2008|publisher=VS-Verlag|location=Wiesbaden|pages=172–173}}</ref>

Despite the European Union's failure to accede to the Convention, the ECtHR has consistently held that member states are bound by ECHR guarantees even when executing and implementing EU law.<ref name=":0" /> Nevertheless, the Court has simultaneously sought to promote international cooperation and avoid interfering in internal Union affairs. It has balanced the conflicting aims of fostering European harmony and avoiding ECHR circumvention via the "[[Bosphorus Presumption]]", a policy of conditional deference articulated in ''Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi v Ireland''. Because the CJEU represents a "comparable" human rights enforcement mechanism, the ECtHR may presume "that a State has not departed from the requirements of the Convention when it does no more than implement legal obligations flowing from its [EU] membership".<ref>{{Cite web |last=European Court of Human Rights |title=Bosphorus Hava Yolları Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Ireland |url=https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#%7B%22itemid%22:%5B%22002-3835%22%5D%7D |access-date=2024-05-15 |website=HUDOC}}</ref> This presumption may be refuted in any particular instances where protections of Convention rights are "manifestly deficient".

===National courts===
Most of the contracting parties to the European Convention on Human Rights have incorporated the convention into their own national legal systems, either through constitutional provision, statute or judicial decision.<ref>Helen Keller and [[Alec Stone Sweet]], [http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199535262.do? ''A Europe of Rights: The Impact of the ECHR on National Legal Systems''] ([[Oxford University Press]], 2008).</ref> The ECtHR increasingly considers judicial dialogue with national courts to be a "high priority", especially when it comes to implementation of judgements.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Glas |first1=Lize R. |title=European Yearbook on Human Rights 2018 |date=2018 |publisher=Intersentia |isbn=978-1-78068-800-8 |pages=287–318 |chapter=The Boundaries to Dialogue with the European Court of Human Rights}}</ref> According to a 2012 study, the ECtHR tends to justify its decisions with citations to its own case law in order to convince national courts to accept its rulings.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lupu |first1=Yonatan |last2=Voeten |first2=Erik |date=2012 |title=Precedent in International Courts: A Network Analysis of Case Citations by the European Court of Human Rights |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science/article/abs/precedent-in-international-courts-a-network-analysis-of-case-citations-by-the-european-court-of-human-rights/0751B7A11AE1D9671F7C3D439E76C375 |journal=British Journal of Political Science |volume=42 |issue=2 |pages=413–439 |doi=10.1017/S0007123411000433 |s2cid=14120365 |issn=1469-2112 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220820121044/https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science/article/abs/precedent-in-international-courts-a-network-analysis-of-case-citations-by-the-european-court-of-human-rights/0751B7A11AE1D9671F7C3D439E76C375 |archive-date=20 August 2022 |access-date=20 August 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref>

In 2015, Russia adopted a law declaring it legal to overrule judgements from the ECtHR,<ref>{{Cite news |date=2015-12-15|title=Putin signs law allowing Russia to overturn rulings of international rights courts |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-court-putin-idUSKBN0TY17H20151215|access-date=2021-02-19}}</ref> codifying an earlier Russian Constitutional Court decision which ruled that Russia could refuse to recognize an ECtHR decision if it conflicted with the [[Constitution of Russia]],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33521553|title=Russia may overrule European law|date=14 July 2015|work=BBC News}}</ref> and in 2020 Russia made [[2020 Russian constitutional referendum|constitutional amendments]] stipulating that the Russian Constitution supersedes international law. (In March 2022, due to the [[Russian invasion of Ukraine]] and a history of disregard for the principles of the Convention, [[Russia in the Council of Europe|Russia was expelled from the Council of Europe]].) Other countries have also moved to restrict the binding nature of the ECtHR judgments, subject to the countries' own constitutional principles. In 2004, the [[Federal Constitutional Court]] of Germany ruled that judgements handed down by the ECtHR are not always binding on German courts.<ref>{{cite web |author=Thorsten Ader |url=https://merlin.obs.coe.int/iris/2004/10/article14.en.html |title=Germany: Binding Effect of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights |publisher=Council of Europe |date=14 October 2004 |access-date=23 May 2019 |archive-date=15 October 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091015012514/http://merlin.obs.coe.int/iris/2004/10/article14.en.html |url-status=dead }}</ref> The [[Italian Constitutional Court]] also restricts the applicability of ECtHR decisions.<ref>{{Cite SSRN|last1=Motoc|first1=Iulia|last2=Volikas|first2=Markos|date=2019-02-17|title=The Dialogue between the ECHR and the Italian Constitutional Court: The Saga of 'Giem and Others V Italy |ssrn=3336144}}</ref>

A 2016 book characterizes [[Austria]], [[Belgium]], [[Czech Republic|Czechia]], [[Germany]], [[Italy]], [[Poland]], and [[Sweden]] to be mostly friendly to ECtHR judgements; [[France]], [[Hungary]], [[Netherlands|the Netherlands]], [[Norway]], [[Switzerland]], and [[Turkey]] to be moderately critical; the [[United Kingdom]] to be strongly critical; and [[Russia]] to be openly hostile.<ref>{{cite book |editor1-last=Popelier |editor1-first=Patricia |editor2-last=Lambrecht |editor2-first=Sarah |editor3-last=Lemmens |editor3-first=Koen |title=Criticism of the European Court of Human Rights: Shifting the Convention System : Counter-dynamics at the National and EU Level |date=2016 |publisher=Intersentia |isbn=978-1-78068-401-7 |language=en}}</ref> In 2019, south Caucasus states were judged partially compliant in a law review article.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Remezaite |first1=Ramute |title=Challenging the Unconditional: Partial Compliance with ECtHR Judgments in the South Caucasus States |journal=Israel Law Review |date=2019 |volume=52 |issue=2 |pages=169–195 |doi=10.1017/S0021223719000049|s2cid=210381634 }}</ref>