Today the protocol amending the Conv

sakib1555

Protocol No. 15 amending the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms , with the exceptions it contains, comes into force on August 1, 2021, that is, today. Its practical effects are the following: The principle of subsidiarity and the concept of margin of appreciation are reaffirmed . At the end of the Preamble the following recital is added: "Affirming that it is primarily the responsibility of the High Contracting Parties, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, to ensure respect for the rights and freedoms defined in this Convention and its protocols, and that , In doing so, they enjoy a margin of appreciation, under the control of the European Court of Human Rights which establishes this Convention," (Art. 1 of Protocol 15). The period to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights from the final internal decision is reduced by two months, from six to four months . Article 35.1 of the Convention. (Article 4 of Protocol 15). Although there is a transitional period. (art. 8 of Protocol 15) The European Court of Human Rights may reject a case , even if it has not been properly examined by a national court, when the plaintiff has not suffered significant harm. Article 35.3.b of the Convention, (art. 5 of Protocol 15) The classification of damage as significant is the responsibility of the European Court of Human Rights. As the “Guide on Admissibility” tells us , “this concept refers to the idea that the violation of a right, even if it is real from a purely legal point of view, must reach a minimum level of seriousness to justify its examination by a international jurisdiction”; “The seriousness of a violation must be assessed taking into account, at the same time, the subjective perception of the plaintiff and the objective magnitude of a given matter.”


“In addition, in order to assess the subjective importance of the issue for the plaintiff, the Court may take into account the plaintiff's behavior, for example, investigating whether he remained inactive during the course of the procedure for a certain period, thus demonstrating his lack of interest in the outcome of this.” The minimum severity required to justify an examination by this Court must meet certain elements, “namely, the nature of the right whose  WhatsApp Number List violation is alleged, the seriousness of the alleged violation or the potential consequences of the violation on the personal situation of the person.” demanding ". The damage may be financial or of another nature. See pages 91 and following of the aforementioned Guide. “This concept refers to the idea that the violation of a right, even if it is real from a purely legal point of view, must reach a minimum level of seriousness to justify its examination by an international jurisdiction” (Photo: Economist & Jurist) An important issue is the change in the deadline to file the claim before the Court, from August 1, 2021, it goes from 6 to 4 months; However, on a temporary basis this change in the submission period will come into force after a period of six months from the entry into force of Protocol No. 15, from August 1, 2021 to February 1, 2022, and in the cases where If the final internal resolution has been issued before February 1, 2022, the period will be 6 months. Conclusion, the 4-month period will affect the claims that are intended to be filed before the Court based on a final internal resolution issued as of February 2, 2022. Issued on February 1, 2022 (before the entry into force of art. 4 of the Protocol), term 6 months; issued on February 2 (the day that article 4 comes into force), term 4 months: “Article 4 of this Protocol will enter into force after a period of six months from the date of entry into force of this Protocol.





Article 4 of this Protocol shall not apply to claims in respect of which the final resolution referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 35 of the Convention has been taken before the entry into force of Article 4 of this Protocol.”  The principle of subsidiarity and the concept of margin of appreciation, until now, doctrinal elements developed by the European Court of Human Rights, when incorporated into the Convention through its Preamble, take shape and have direct effects in the domestic judicial process, understood as this, and as an example, in the civil jurisdictional order, from the conciliation requested before the Court of Peace of the most remote town in Spain, or the preliminary proceedings requested before a Court of First Instance, to the appeal for protection filed before the Court Constitutional, passing when extraordinary resources and instances are possible, and even, when the matter deals with European Union Law, the presentation of the preliminary question of article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union . The principle of subsidiarity is extendable to domestic courts. Alleged injury to a right guaranteed in the Convention and its Protocols, or alleged injury to a fundamental right susceptible to constitutional protection, when the body that issues a resolution does not take into account the allegation of the injury suffered, through the system of resources, article 18.1 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary , allows the internal judicial body, when resolving the appeal, to repair the alleged injury. This is valid for the processing of the process in the ordinary Courts, and for the Constitutional Court in terms of orders, orders, and the correction or validation of procedural defects, not for sentences, since according to article 93 of the Organic Law of the Constitutional Court , these are not subject to any appeal, and only clarification can be requested.