The undermining of article 6 ECHR
Abstract
In 2018, the European Court of Human Rights ’ case law continued to raise
signifi cant questions about the nature of criminal fair trial rights under Article 6.
Th is contribution considers the Court ’ s recent case law on Article 6, with a
particular emphasis on developments in cases such as Beuze v Belgium of
November 2018. Th is contribution argues that the Court continues to undermine
the text of the Convention through its interpretation of Article 6 ’ s ‘ internal
structure, ’ with undesirable consequences for assessing violations in future
applications. Moreover, the contribution argues that the case law demonstrates
dangerously greater willingness to countenance public interest justifi cations and
balancing in the context of Article 6. Th e fi nding in Beuze was that Belgium had
violated Article 6 rights; the legacy of Beuze and the trends evident in the 2018
case law will be that governments in future applications will fi nd it increasingly
easy to justify infringements of those rights. Despite its protestations to the
contrary, it seems that the Court intends to convert Article 6 into a two-word ‘ fair
trial ’ guarantee, under which every application boils down to whether or not the
overall proceedings were fair. Th is should trouble those who take an interest in
the most heavily-litigated provision of the Convention.
Description
Keywords
Citation
Collections
Source
Type
Book Title
European Yearbook on Human Rights 2019
Entity type
Access Statement
License Rights
Restricted until
2099-12-31
Downloads
File
Description