Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights
The Court is currently made up of 47 judges, one in principle for every State signed up to the Convention. They are elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and serve for six years. Judges sit on the Court as individuals and do not represent their country. Website: www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=home
- Arbitrary arrest and detention 5
- Armed forces / Military 2
- Armed groups / Militias / Paramilitary forces / Resistance movements 2
- Asylum-seekers 2
- Azeri 1
- Belarusians 2
- Burden of proof 1
- Chechen 1
- Christian 8
- Civil and political rights 2
- Complementary forms of protection 1
- Country of origin information (COI) 9
- Credibility assessment 4
- Criminal justice 7
- Decision on admissibility 7
- Deportation / Forcible return 22
- Discrimination based on race, nationality, ethnicity 1
- Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) 2
- Expulsion 7
- Extradition 1
- Extrajudicial executions 1
- Family law 1
- Family reunification 2
- Female genital mutilation (FGM) 1
- Forced marriage 4
- Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment 28
- HIV and AIDS 2
- Honour killings 3
- Human rights activists 1
- Human rights and fundamental freedoms 1
- Illegitimate children 1
- Immigration Detention 2
- Immigration law 1
- Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) 12
- Kurd 1
- Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) 4
- Mental health 6
- Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription 3
- Muslim 2
- National security / Public order 1
- Non-state agents of persecution 1
- Persecution based on political opinion 15
- Persecution of family members 2
- Persecution on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity 3
- Persons with disabilities 1
- Physical harm 1
- Political parties 2
- Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) 2
- Prison or detention conditions 1
- Prosecution vs persecution 1
- Public health 2
- Refoulement 1
- Refugees 2
- Regional instruments 4
- Religious discrimination 1
- Religious persecution (including forced conversion) 4
- Residence permits / Residency 2
- Right to family life 6
- Right to health 1
- Right to justice 2
- Right to liberty and security 2
- Right to life 7
- Rights of non-citizens 1
- Roma 1
- Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness 1
- Sabean Mandean 2
- Security situation 4
- Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) 3
- Sharia law 1
- Social group discrimination 1
- State protection 3
- Statelessness 2
- Sunni 2
- Sur place persecution 1
- Terrorism 1
- Threats / Intimidation 3
- Torture 1
- Tutsis 1
- Uighur 1
- Unlawful departure 2
- Visas 2
- Well-founded fear of persecution 1
- Women's rights 1
- Women-at-risk 1
|
Lagerblom v. Sweden
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision. The applicant is a Finnish national who settled in Sweden in the 1980s. In February 1993, he was charged with a criminal offence. He was convicted in May 1994. The sentence was confirmed in appeal in June 1995. During the whole procedure, the applicant, for whom a lawyer was appointed, spoke in Finnish and submitted documents in Finnish. He also wanted to be represented by a different lawyer, one who understood Finnish. Before the Court he complained on the basis of Art. 6 § 3 of the ECHR, that he was not allowed to be defended by a lawyer of his choice. As a consequence his appointed lawyer, who did not or understand speak Finnish, could not carry out his duties properly. The Court started by saying that the right to chose one's lawyer was not absolute, notably when free legal aid is concerned. In appointing lawyers domestic courts should have regard to the wishes of the accused but these can be overridden when necessary for the interests of justice. In this case, the Court noted that the applicant's command of Swedish was sufficient to communicate with his lawyer and that in any case interpretation was provided during the hearings and when submitting documents in Finnish. For all these reasons, the Court decided that there was no breach of Art. 6 § 3 of the ECHR. 14 April 2003 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Countries: Finland - Sweden |
|
Ammari v. Sweden
22 October 2002 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Countries: Algeria - Sweden |
|
S.C.C. v. Sweden
Admissibility application. 15 February 2000 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Complementary forms of protection - Deportation / Forcible return - HIV and AIDS - Public health - Residence permits / Residency - Right to life | Countries: Sweden - Zambia |
|
Wiff Jama v. Sweden
12 October 1999 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Countries: Ethiopia - Sweden |
|
Lilia, Julia and Eleonora Alimzhanova and Alexjis Lisikov v. Sweden
24 August 1999 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Expulsion | Countries: Latvia - Sweden |
|
Antoine Zoghaib v. Sweden
29 June 1999 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Decision on admissibility - Expulsion | Countries: Lebanon - Sweden |
|
Slavov v. Sweden
29 June 1999 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Criminal justice - Expulsion - Persecution based on political opinion - Right to family life - Rights of non-citizens - Statelessness | Countries: Bulgaria - Sweden |
|
Vedran Andric v. Sweden
23 February 1999 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Countries: Croatia - Sweden |
|
Mohammed Lemine Ould Barar v. Sweden
19 January 1999 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Decision on admissibility | Countries: Mauritania - Sweden |
|
Cruz Varas and Others v. Sweden
20 March 1991 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Countries: Chile - Sweden |
