The European Court of Human Rights

Some Facts and Figures

COUNCIL CONSEIL
COUNCIL CONSEIL
OF
OF EUROPE DEL’EUROPE
EUROPE DE L'EUROPE
Cour européenne des Droits de l’Homme
The European Convention on The European Court of Human
Human Rights Rights

T T
he Convention is an international
treaty under which the member
States of the Council of Europe
promise to secure fundamental civil and
political rights, not only to their own
citizens (currently numbering 800,000
million people) but also to everyone
within their jurisdiction, irrespective of, for
example, sex, race, nationality or ethnic
origin. The Convention, which was signed
on 4 November 1950 in Rome, entered
into force in 1953.
The Convention’s importance lies not
only in the scope of the rights which it
protects, but also in the protection system
set up in Strasbourg to examine alleged
violations and to ensure that the States
comply with their obligations under the
Convention.
he European Court of Human Rights,
set up in 1959, is an international
court with jurisdiction to rule, through
binding judgments, on individual and inter-
State applications alleging violations of the
Convention.
Since 1998 the Court has operated on a
full-time basis. It is made up of 47 judges,
one for every State Party to the Convention.
The judges, who are totally independent,
are elected for six-year terms by the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of
Europe. On account of the considerable
increase in the number of applications and
the Court’s excessive workload, the member
States of the Council of Europe decided to
reform the supervisory machinery introduced
by the Convention; as a result, they adopted
Protocol No. 14 to the Convention* in 2004.

The guarantees

The Convention and its Protocols guarantee, in particular:

- the right to life;

- the right to a fair hearing in civil and criminal cases;
- the right to respect for private and family life;
- freedom of expression;
- freedom of thought, conscience and religion;
- the right to an effective remedy;
- the right to peaceful enjoyment of one’s possessions;
- the right to vote and to stand for election.

The prohibitions
The Convention and its Protocols prohibit, in particular:

- torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;

- slavery and forced labour;
- arbitrary and unlawful detention;
- discrimination in the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention;
- the expulsion or removal by a State of its own nationals;
- the death penalty;
- the collective expulsion of foreign nationals.

*Protocol No. 14, which is intended to guarantee the Court’s long-term effectiveness by
optimising the filtering and processing of applications, envisages, among other measures,
the creation of new judicial formations for the simplest cases and a new admissibility criterion
(the existence of “significant disadvantage”) and introduces a nine-year non-renewable term
of office for judges. It will enter into force once all the States Party to the Convention have
ratified it (to date, 46 out of the 47 States have ratified Protocol No. 14).

European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures 

 Case-processing flow chart
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
COUR EUROPEENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME
Case-processing flowchart Application lodged

If not disposed of administratively

One of
the Court’s
5 Sections

Chamber Committee
If not unanimous
(7 Judges) (3 Judges)

Relinquishment
of jurisdiction by
a Chamber
If unanimous

Admissibility and
Admissibility and merits
merits taken together
taken separately
(Joint procedure)

Decision:
Decision: Application
Application rejected
declared admissible
(inadmissible/struck out)

Judgment

Just satisfaction Just satisfaction

reserved included

Judgment on just
satisfaction

Request by a Party
for a re-hearing
granted

Respondent
Grand State executes
Chamber judgment/Committee of
(17 Judges) Ministers supervises
execution

This flowchart indicates the progress of a case through the different judicial formations. In the interests of readability, it
does not include certain stages in the procedure – such as communication of an application to the respondent State,
consideration of a re-hearing request by the Panel of the Grand Chamber and friendly settlement negotiations.

This flowchart indicates the progress of a case through the different judicial formations. In the interests of
readability, it does not include certain stages in the procedure – such as communication of an application to
the respondent State, consideration of a re-hearing request by the Panel of the Grand Chamber and friendly
settlement negotiations.

 European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures

Applying to the European Court
of Human Rights
T
he Convention system for protecting
human rights must first of all be
applied at national level. Each
member State has a duty to ensure that
everyone within its jurisdiction enjoys
the rights protected by the Convention.
If this is not the case, any individual,
group of individuals or non-governmental
organisation which considers that it
has been a victim of a violation may,
subject to certain conditions, apply to
the European Court of Human Rights.
Applications may also be lodged by
one State against another (inter-State
applications). In any event, applications
may only be made against States which
have signed the European Convention on
Human Rights.
The Court rules on the admissibility and,
where appropriate, the merits of the
cases submitted to it. Its jurisdiction is
binding on all the Contracting States.
The processing of applications
I
n order for an application to be
admissible, the applicant must have
exhausted the effective remedies
available in the country in which the
alleged violation was committed. He
or she must also lodge the application
within six months of the date on which
the courts or authorities of that State
issued their final decision. Cases which
are manifestly ill-founded are declared
inadmissible.
Where an application is not inadmissible,
the Court encourages the parties to
reach a friendly settlement. If this
proves impossible, the Court rules on
the case in a Chamber of seven judges
or, in exceptionally important cases, in a
Grand Chamber made up of 17 judges.
All of the Court’s final judgments are
binding on the States found to have
violated the Convention, which are
obliged to execute them.
The execution of judgments
T
he Committee of Ministers of the
Council of Europe is responsible for
supervising the execution of the
Court’s judgments. It verifies whether
European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures
the States found guilty of a violation
have indeed adopted the necessary
general measures to avoid any other
violations of the same kind (amendments
to legislation, legal doctrine, regulations
or practice, etc.).
The Committee of Ministers also checks
whether the applicant has been paid any
compensation awarded by the Court and,
in certain cases, whether other specific
measures have been taken (reopening
of a trial; cancellation of a prohibition
order or confiscation order; correction of
a criminal record; delivery of a residence
permit; etc.).
Not to be confused!
European Court of Human Rights
Ensures that States comply with
their obligations under the European
Convention on Human Rights. Made up
of one judge for each State party to the
Convention, and based in Strasbourg.
Court of Justice of the European
Communities
Based in Luxembourg, this Court
ensures compliance with EU law
and rules on the interpretation and
application of the treaties establishing
the European Union.
International Court of Justice
Judicial organ of the United Nations,
based in The Hague.
European Convention on Human
Rights
The treaty by which the member
States of the Council of Europe have
undertaken to respect fundamental
human rights and freedoms.
Universal Declaration of Human
Rights
Text adopted by the United Nations in
1948 in order to strengthen human
rights protection at international level.
Charter of Fundamental Rights
European Union text on human rights
and fundamental freedoms, adopted in
2000.

 European Court of Human Rights 31/12/2007

Applications allocated to a decision body

Applications allocated to a decision body
----------
Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme
Requêtes attribuées à un organe décisionnel

50000
45016
45000 32500
27200
40000 28200

35000
32409

28201 27178
30000

25000

20000
13843
15000 10475
8408
10000

5000

0
1959-1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Applications which are allocated to a decision body are those for which the Court has received a correctly completed
form, accompanied by copies of relevant documents. These applications will be examined by a Committee or by a
Chamber of the Court. These figures do not include applications which are at the pre-judicial stage (incomplete
case file).
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Pending allocated cases

On 1 January 2008 approximately 79.400 applications were pending before a decision body.

PENDING ALLOCATED CASES

31/12/2007
all others 19300 Russia 20300
24% 26%

France 2350 3%

Germany 2500 3%

Slovenia 2700 3%
Turkey 9150
Italy 2900 4% 12%
Czech Rep. 3000 4%
Poland 3100 Romania 8300
4% Ukraine 5800 10%
7%
Total number of pending cases : 79,400

 European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures

 European Court of Human Rights 31/12/2007

Judgments
----------
Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme
Judgments deliveredArrêts by the Court

1800

1560
1600 1503

1400

1200 1105

1000 889
837 844

800 695 703 718

600

400

177
200

0
1959-1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Since the reform of the Convention system in 1998, the Court has seen a considerable increase in its workload. In
2007 the Court focused on examining complex cases and decided to join certain applications which raised similar
legal problems, so that they could be examined together. Thus, although it delivered fewer judgments in 2007
than in the previous year, the Court completed its examination of a greater number of applications.

Violation judgments by country

2007
Turkey
Others 22%
45%

Romania
6%
Russia
13% 1999-2007
Ukraine Poland
7% 7%
Others Italy
41% 21%

Russia
5% Turkey
20%

France
Poland 7%
6%

Almost half of the judgments delivered by the Court in 2007 concerned four of the 47 member States of the
Council of Europe: Turkey, Russia, Poland and Ukraine. In almost 90% of the total number of judgments delivered
in 2007 the Court identified at least one violation of the Convention and found against the respondent State.

European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures 

 Subject-matter of the Court’s judgments
2007
Others
20% Right to a fair
trial (6)
24%
Right to an
effective remedy
(13)
8%
Length of
proceedings (6)
18%
Right to liberty 1999-2007
and security (5)
Protection of Right to an
13% effective remedy
property (P1-1) Others Length of
17% (13) 16% proceedings (6)
8% 30%

Right to liberty
and security (5)
10%
Right to a fair
trial (6)
Protection of
21%
property (P1-1)
15%

In 37% of the judgments finding a violation which were delivered in 2007, the Court concluded that there had
been a violation of Article 6 of the Convention, either in respect of fairness or the length of proceedings. More
than 53 % of the judgments in 2007 concluded that there had been a violation of one of two Articles of the
Convention, namely Article 6 (right to a fair hearing) or Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property). In
addition, in almost 9 % of cases, the Court concluded that there had been a serious violation of the Convention,
concerning the right to life or the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Articles 2 and 3 of
the Convention).

Examples of judgments delivered by the Court in 2007

Article 2 • Unintended killing of person during Some

right to life
• Failure of the police to protect the lives
of the applicant’s children, eventually
killed by their father - violation.
Kontrová v. Slovakia, 7510/04
• Extrajudicial execution of tens of citizens
by security forces and subsequent failure to
conduct an effective investigation - violations.
Musayev and Others v. Russia, 57941/00,
58699/00 and 60403/00
• De facto impunity of State agents
convicted of complicity in the torture
and subsequent death of a person in
police custody - effectiveness of criminal
proceedings - violation.
Teren Aksakal v. Turkey, 51967/99
• Death by gradual asphyxia of a young
man who was handcuffed and held face
down to the ground by police officers for
over thirty minutes - violation.
Saoud v. France, 9375/02
siege after he had been firing at police examples of
officers - no violation.
Huohvanainen v. Finland, 57389/00 judgments
delivered by
• Lack of independence of police force
called upon to investigate allegations of
the Court in
security force collusion in the death of the 2007
applicant’s husband - violation.
Brecknell v. United Kingdom, 32457/04
• Effectiveness of a continuing twelve-
year inquiry into a fatal explosion in a
state-of-emergency region - violation.
Kamil Uzun v. Turkey, 37410/97
• Inadequacy of criminal sentence
imposed on police officers responsible for
ill-treatment causing death - violation.
Nikolova and Velichkova v. Bulgaria,
7888/03
• Investigative failings concerning a fatal
shooting following the intervention of an
off-duty police officer - violation.
Celniku v. Greece, 21449/04

 European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures

Some Article 3
examples of prohibition of torture or
judgments inhuman or degrading
delivered by
treatment
the Court in
2007 • Torture of opposition leader and lack of
effective investigation - violation.
Mammadov (Jalaloglu) v. Azerbaijan,
34445/04
• Torture and wrongful detention of
Chechnyan applicants - violation.
Chitayev and Chitayev v. Russia,
59334/00
• Force-feeding of prisoner on hunger
strike in protest against prison conditions
- violation.
Ciorap v. Moldova, 12066/02
• Use of a teargas, known as “pepper
spray”, to break up demonstrators - no
violation.
Çiloğlu and Others v. Turkey, 73333/01
• Conditions of pre-trial detention and
detainee’s obligation to pay for their
improvement - violation.
Modarca v. Moldova, 14437/05
• Full body search of prisoner including
systematic visual inspection of the anus
after each prison visit during a period of
two years - violation.
Frérot v. France, 70204/01
• Placement in a disciplinary isolation cell,
lack of medical care and undernourishment
of a detainee suffering from tuberculosis
and wearing of handcuffs at public hearings
not justified by security requirements -
violations.
Gorodnichev v. Russia, 52058/99
• Allegation by the applicant that she
was forced by the conduct of the family-
allowance-contribution collection agency
to continue to work as a prostitute - no
violation.
Tremblay v. France, 37194/02
• Conditions in which a prisoner suffering
from serious illness was held and lack of
adequate medical care - violation.
Yakovenko v. Ukraine, 15825/06
• Conditions of detention of a prisoner
suffering from mental disorders - violation.
Dybeku v. Albania, 41153/06
• Unjustified strip-search during arrest -
violation.
Wieser v. Austria, 2293/03
• Failure to carry out an effective
investigation into racist attack on a
member of the Roma - violation.
Šečić v. Croatia, 40116/02
• Failure to take into account a prisoner’s
serious invalidity when arranging for his
detention and transfer - violation.
Hüseyin Yildirim v. Turkey, 2778/02
• Risk of deportation to Afghanistan - no
violation in case of deportation.
Sultani v. France, 45223/05
European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures
Article 5
right to liberty and security
• Circumvention of a domestic law
provision on maximum length of detention
by re-detaining person ten minutes after
release - violation.
John v. Greece, 199/05
• Failure to give detailed reasons for the
continued detention of a remand prisoner
- violation.
Castravet v. Moldova, 23393/05
• Failure by the Belgian judicial authorities
to give any serious consideration to the
question of alternatives to preventive
detention - violation.
Lelièvre v. Belgium, 11287/03
• Lack of confidentiality of lawyer-client
communications due to indiscriminate use
of a glass partition in a detention centre
- violation.
Modarca v. Moldova, 14437/05
• Inconsistent interpretation of provisions
applicable to detainees awaiting extradition
- violation.
Nasrulloyew v. Russia, 656/06
• Prolonged detention in an ordinary
remand centre pending admission to a
psychiatric hospital - violation.
Mocarska v. Poland, 26917/05
Article 6
right to a fair trial
• Temporary suspension of courts in
Chechnya owing to a counter-terrorist
operation - violation.
Khamidov v. Russia, 72118/01
• Retrospective and final determination
of the merits of pending litigation by
legislative intervention that was not
justified by compelling general-interest
grounds - violation.
Arnolin and Others and 24 other cases v.
France, 20127/03 etc.
• Failure to communicate to the applicant
decisions and documents sent by the
public prosecutor to the court and a note
from the judge to the court of appeal -
violation.
Ferreira Alves v. Portugal (n° 3),
25053/05
• Restrictions on access to case file
in lustration proceedings resulting in
politician’s temporary disqualification from
public office - violation.
Matyjek v. Poland, 38184/03
• Failure to comply with a final judgment
requiring administrative authorities
to deliver up possession of a building
occupied by a governmental organisation
that enjoyed diplomatic immunity -
violation.
Hirschhorn v. Romania, 29294/02

• Arbitrary findings of the domestic
courts - violation.
Khamidov v. Russia, 72118/01
• Outcome of pending civil litigation
affected by statutory amendment
favourable to the State and contrary to the
applicants’ interests - violation.
SCM Scanner de l’ouest lyonnais and
Others v. France, 12106/03
• Lack of impartiality of a Supreme Court
judge whose son had been expelled from
a school run by one of the parties to the
dispute - violation.
Tocono and Profesorii Prometeişti v.
Moldova, 32263/03
• Obligation for the registered keeper of
a vehicle to provide information identifying
the driver where a road-traffic offence is
suspected: no violation.
O’Halloran and Francis v. United Kingdom,
15809/02 and 25624/02
• Allegation by the applicant that the
German courts had no jurisdiction to
try him for serious offences, including
genocide, committed in Bosnia - no
violation.
Jorgic v. Germany, 74613/01
• Interception of a private telephone
conversation between an accused taking
part in a hearing by videoconference and
his lawyer - violation.
Zagaria v. Italy, 58295/00
Article 8
right to respect for private
and family life
• Requirement of father’s consent for
the continued storage and implantation of
fertilised eggs - no violation.
Evans v. United Kingdom, 6339/05
• Use in evidence of a recording of a
conversation obtained by a body-mounted
listening device and of a list of the
telephone calls made - violations.
Heglas v. Czech Republic, 5935/02
• Refusal to perform a therapeutic abortion
despite risks of serious deterioration of the
mother’s eyesight - violation.
Tysiąc v. Poland, 5410/03
• Husband in prison refused permission
for artificial insemination - violation.
Dickson v. United Kingdom, 44362/04
• Refusal to register the forename “Axl”
even though other requests to take that
name had been granted - violation.
Johansson v. Finland, 10163/02
• Return of a child to its father in the
United States under the Hague Convention
on the Civil Aspects of International Child
Abduction - no violation.
Maumousseau and Washington v. France,
39388/05
• Interception of prisoners’ letters to
their lawyer - violation.
Ekinci and Akalin v. Turkey, 77097/01
 European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures
• Police providing, in absence of Some
regulatory framework, technical assistance examples of
to an individual who wished to record
his conversations with the applicant - judgments
violation. delivered by
van Vondel v. the Netherlands, 38258/03 the Court in
• Unjustified search and seizure at 2007
lawyer’s home without safeguards -
violation.
Smirnov v. Russia, 71362/01
Article 9
freedom of thought,
conscience and religion
• Refusal to grant full exemption from
instruction in Christianity, religion and
philosophy in State primary schools -
violation.
Folgerø and Others v. Norway, 15472/02
• Unlawful termination of meeting
organised by Jehovah’s Witnesses -
violation.
Kuznetsov and Others v. Russia, 184/02
• Employment terminated on account of
religious beliefs - violation.
Ivanova v. Bulgaria, 52435/99
Article 10
freedom of expression
• Conviction of a journalist for the
publication of a diplomatic document on
strategy classified as confidential - no
violation.
Stoll v. Switzerland, 69698/01
• Ban on Kurdish production of a play in
municipal buildings - violation.
Ulusoy and Others v. Turkey, 34797/03
• Convictions of journalists for using
and reproducing material from a pending
criminal investigation in a book -
violation.
Dupuis and Others v. France, 1914/02
• Detention of a journalist with a view to
compelling him to disclose his source of
information - violation.
Voskuil v. Netherlands, 64752/01
• Search and seizure operations carried
out at the home and office of a journalist
suspected of corruption of a European
Union official - violation.
Tillack v. Belgium, 20477/05
• Injunction restraining a parent from
repeating criticism he had made of
schoolteachers’ conduct - violation.
Ferihumer v. Austria, 30547/03
• Unlawful dismissal of a civil servant
following a search of his office in apparent
retaliation for a letter he had published in
the press criticising the chief prosecutor -
violation.
Peev v. Bulgaria, 64209/01
• Imposition of a fine for defamatory
allegation of plagiary - violation.
Boldea v. Romania, 19997/02
Some Article 11
examples of
freedom of peaceful
judgments assembly
delivered by
• Unlawful refusal to grant permission for
the Court in
a march and meetings to protest against
2007 homophobia - violation.
Bączkowski and Others v. Poland,
1543/06
• Dispersal of a peaceful demonstration
for failure to give prior notice to the police
- violation.
Bukta and Others v. Hungary, 25691/04
• Repeated delays by authorities in
registering an association - violation.
Ramazanova and Others v. Azerbaijan,
44363/02
• Bad-faith denial of re-registration,
resulting in the applicant association’s loss
of legal status - violation.
Church of Scientology Moscow v. Russia,
18147/02
Article 13
right to an effective
remedy
• Lack of domestic remedy enabling a
prisoner to challenge a refusal to forward
correspondence - violation.
Frérot v. France, 70204/01
Article 14
prohibition of
discrimination
• Failure to carry out an effective
investigation into racist attack on a
member of the Roma - violation.
Šečić v. Croatia, 40116/02
• Placement of Roma gypsy children in
“special” schools - violation.
D.H. and Others v. Czech Republic,
57325/00
Article 34
individual applications
• Refusal by penitentiary officials to send
an application to the ECHR on the grounds
of alleged non exhaustion of domestic
remedies - violation.
Nurmagomedov v. Russia, 30138/02
Article 38
examination of the case
and friendly settlement
proceedings
• Refusal by Government to disclose
documents from ongoing investigation into
an abduction and killing by servicemen
or into allegations of harassment of the
applicants - violation.
Akhmadova and Sadulayeva v. Russia,
40464/02
European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures
• Refusal by respondent Government
to disclose documents from ongoing
investigation into the disappearance of the
applicant’s husband - violation.
Baysayeva v. Russia, 74237/01
• Refusal by Government to disclose
documents from ongoing investigation into
an abduction and killing by servicemen
or into allegations of harassment of the
applicants - violation.
Bitiyeva and X v. Russia, 57953/00 and
37392/03
• Government’s refusal to disclose
documents from ongoing investigations
into the disappearance of the applicant’s
relatives in Chechnya during military
operations - violation.
Kukayev v. Russia, 29361/02 and Khamila
Isayeva v. Russia, 6846/02
Article 1 of Protocol No. 1
protection of property
• Setting aside of a trade mark
registration - no violation.
Anheuser-Busch Inc. v. Portugal,
73049/01
• Court order finally annulling, more
than thirty years after their lawful
acquisition, a title to properties belonging
to a foundation set up by a religious
minority - violation.
Fener Rum Erkek Lisesi Vakfi v. Turkey,
34478/97
Article 2 of Protocol No. 1
right to education
• Refusal to grant full exemption from
instruction in Christianity, religion and
philosophy in State primary schools -
violation.
Folgerø and Others v. Norway, 15472/02
• Refusal to exempt a State school pupil
whose family was of the Alevi faith from
mandatory lessons on religion and morals
- violation.
Hasan and Eylem Zengin v. Turkey,
1448/04
Article 3 of Protocol No. 1
right to free elections
• Ancillary penalty of removal from
office imposed on Member of Parliament
on the dissolution of his party -
violation.
Sobaci v. Turkey, 26733/02
Article 2 of Protocol No. 4
freedom of movement
• Inability to travel abroad as a result
of an entry arbitrarily made in passport -
violation.
Sissanis v. Romania, 23468/02

 1/1
European Court of Human Rights

10
Violations
Violationby
by article
Article and
andbyby country
Country
Fr In R Fr R
ie R hu ig ee ig Oth
To Ju ig La
m
La Pr
N R ht e
ta
nd
l
ht ck a ck oh Ri
o
ht do
m F i g
Pr no r A
ln
dg
m to of n of ib gh p to
F
re ht oh
J u ou y s
lif ef o ef i t io t t L u r e a of re ed t o i b R
t t rtic
o le
um on en dg t j ett O e fe Pr rd
fe n o en ni iti Pr ig
e ts m u le th -d eg R gt sh fam spend tho ed a om an on ot R ht tw be s o
be
e e
ct
iv
oh
i ra
ct
iv
la of libe
b s r i g h m ef o ec ig to
ro vi fi vi en dgm me
pr e b e o l t of e ily ct reli ug om sso of
c a R fe f tio h ic trie f t
ol nd ol
e nt
rj
iv in iti di ht nt li fo gio ht o ct di n tt fre e d he
fj at in at ts
io g
ud at ve on ng in ur ave y a
ve to pr w fe r pr n , co f ex iatio sse igh iv sc of o e or C
ud
n
io fin nts s / gm io s of tre s
ry n d
s a oc
e
ith iv n p n m tt e rim p ed e pu on
gm at n di St
e n tig t a tig / f e fa e o at s c r e b o re in r o u le n v
en le n g rik nt of at ortu tm at or c ir di u tl e ie l y m m at pe c at c tio is en
as in s* lif io en io ce uri tri ng aw an nc ssio an ar ed io io he tio
1999-2007 ts t
no g * e n re t n d ty al s d e n d ry y n rty n ns d n
Total Total Total Total Total 2 2 3 3 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 P1-1 2 3 4
Albania 10 8 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 7 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0
Andorra 3 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Armenia 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Austria 164 131 11 17 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 48 53 0 10 0 23 1 0 6 9 0 0 0 3 0
Azerbaijan 10 8 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0
Belgium 82 64 6 12 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 23 43 0 4 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1
Bosnia Herzegovina 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
Bulgaria 169 160 4 3 2 7 7 0 19 8 0 145 22 64 0 9 3 4 8 0 41 3 14 0 0 0 1
Croatia 132 101 4 26 1 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 36 55 0 4 0 0 0 0 16 1 6 0 0 0 0
Cyprus 42 36 1 3 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 5 28 0 2 0 1 0 0 7 2 3 0 1 0 1
Czech Republic 128 115 4 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 27 76 0 11 0 1 1 0 12 2 4 0 0 0 0
Denmark 22 5 6 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Estonia 15 12 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Finland 90 63 17 9 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 22 27 0 11 0 5 0 0 4 0 2 0 0 0 0
France 589 470 56 49 14 2 2 1 7 0 1 25 187 251 2 13 0 11 1 0 25 7 17 0 0 0 4
Georgia 18 13 4 1 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 4 4 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 4 1 2 0 0 0 1
Germany 88 60 18 8 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 11 10 28 0 13 0 1 0 0 2 8 1 0 0 0 0
Greece 366 319 8 19 20 3 3 0 7 3 0 6 70 219 0 2 4 4 2 0 57 3 43 0 1 0 0
Hungary 116 108 2 6 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 5 2 97 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Iceland 8 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Ireland 12 7 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Italy 1715 1322 27 332 34 0 0 0 1 1 0 18 202 948 0 84 0 2 3 0 52 1 263 0 14 0 15
Latvia 30 24 3 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 19 4 6 0 12 2 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 5
Liechtenstein 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lithuania

European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures

35 26 3 6 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 16 6 9 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0
 1/1
European Court of Human Rights
Violations
Violationby Article and
by article Country
andbyby country
Fr In R Fr R
ie R hu ig ee ig Oth
To Ju ig
h
La
c m
La
c
Pr
o R N h R ht e
ta dg
nd
l tt k an k hi i o t to
do
m F i gh
Pr no r A
ln m o of o of bi ght p F
re
e t
oh
i t r
J u ou y s
lif tio to Le un r o re to bi R to ticl
um on en dg t j ett O e ef
f e
rd ef
f e n n is fa
es an f
p d t h e
do
a tio Pr
o i g b e
be e ts m u le th -d ct
Pr
oh eg ct la of ibe l R gt hm m ec re ou do as m n n te R ht tw e s o
vi fi e e iv i r a iv b s r i g h i l y t l g m s o f o e f o c i g to i c tri ft
o
vi en dgm me
ro ol nd ol rj pr e bi di e l t ht of en f ig h R fe fd tio ht
fj e nt iv in tio ng in ur ave y a to ct is n to fre e ed he
C
ud a n pr i
at in at ts
io g io fin nts s / v n v r y d o
t w life or p ion t, c of e ciat ass ig
r o io e h ve c o e or
ud
n gm tio es of tre es a ce ith iv ns xp rim fp ed el pu on
gm at n di St n tig to tig / f se fa ou at
e
n mb t to
m
re in ro uc ec
le ng rik en of a r
at
m a or cu ir ed
in t
ci res
e ly m a p a tio
ni ve
s
en as in ts lif tio tu en tio ce r tri la an nc sio an ar ed tio er tio he ntio
1999-2007 ts t
no g ** e n re t n d ity al gs w d e n d ry y n ty n ns d n
Total Total Total Total Total 2 2 3 3 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 P1-1 2 3 4
Luxembourg 19 17 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 10 0 3 0 2 1 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0
Malta 16 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0
Moldova 105 101 0 1 3 0 0 4 20 6 0 38 63 4 0 5 2 10 1 0 16 0 53 0 0 0 8
Monaco 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Montenegro 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Netherlands 70 41 13 12 4 0 3 1 7 0 0 7 7 5 0 11 0 3 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0
Norway 15 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Poland 489 419 28 39 3 0 1 0 2 1 0 155 27 245 0 42 0 7 1 0 14 2 11 0 0 0 2
Portugal 141 83 2 54 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 59 0 3 0 5 0 0 0 1 10 0 0 0 0

European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures

Romania 279 240 8 21 10 0 0 1 5 8 0 9 170 21 1 15 0 4 2 0 3 4 151 0 0 0 5
Russia 399 372 13 11 3 22 23 8 46 5 0 89 242 58 0 14 2 8 5 0 46 1 215 1 2 1 24
San Marino 11 8 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Serbia 15 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8 0 4 0 2 0 0 8 0 4 0 0 0 0
Slovakia 151 126 5 19 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 14 11 97 0 7 0 5 0 0 13 1 4 0 0 0 0
Slovenia 210 202 6 2 0 0 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 198 0 1 0 0 0 0 187 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spain 37 26 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 11 6 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Sweden 42 18 6 18 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 6 9 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 4 0 0 0 0
Switzerland 41 33 6 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 10 4 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
“the former Yugoslav
Republic of
Macedonia” 31 27 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0
Turkey 1641 1395 33 202 11 53 100 17 114 24 0 276 453 194 4 33 1 149 23 0 168 2 411 3 5 0 26
Ukraine 372 366 3 2 1 1 2 1 18 4 0 8 266 66 0 11 3 3 0 0 81 0 185 0 1 0 3
United Kindgom 256 160 35 57 4 1 12 0 6 0 0 40 64 18 0 35 0 2 2 3 22 10 2 0 3 0 1
Sub Total 6749 354 965 129 91 156 34 277 70 1 931 2064 2947 11 382 19 271 59 3 810 66 1423 5 29 4 100
Total 8194*

11
* Three judgments concern two Countries : Moldova & Russia, Georgia & Russia and Romania & Hungary
**Other judgments: just satisfaction, revision judgments, preliminary objections and lack of jurisdiction
12
Workload and output

Applications pending
Applications allocated to Applications disposed of Applications disposed of
before a decision body
State a decision body by decision by judgment
at the end of the year

2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007
Albania 45 52 54 17 28 22 1 2 6 46 75 107
Andorra 5 8 4 2 9 3 - 1 - 5 4 5
Armenia 110 98 614 62 95 44 - - 5 166 169 737
Austria 298 344 329 208 150 272 22 21 23 364 536 568
Azerbaijan 175 221 708 120 57 84 - 3 7 197 362 979
Belgium 173 107 124 192 110 105 14 7 15 154 149 162
Bosnia and Herzegovina 209 243 708 71 149 254 - 1 3 293 383 838
Bulgaria 820 748 821 344 832 586 23 45 53 1783 1661 1835
Croatia 553 640 557 477 352 745 26 22 31 915 1180 957
Cyprus 66 56 63 49 64 27 1 15 7 108 86 116
Czech Republic 1267 2466 808 420 1264 1080 33 39 11 2096 3268 2976
Denmark 72 68 45 86 96 72 3 2 2 81 49 19
Estonia 165 184 154 82 88 127 4 1 3 286 379 405
Finland 243 262 269 256 187 253 13 17 26 433 488 481
France 1821 1831 1552 1442 1374 1549 60 96 48 2081 2442 2346
Georgia 72 105 162 48 33 40 3 5 8 103 171 286
Germany 1592 1601 1485 1386 1121 1685 16 10 12 2221 2687 2495
Greece 365 371 384 349 237 298 105 55 65 452 519 559
Hungary 644 423 528 220 302 323 16 32 24 897 988 1169
Iceland 6 12 9 9 7 6 - - 2 9 14 16
Ireland 45 40 45 36 53 40 3 - - 43 30 35
Italy 847 931 1350 838 580 796 79 103 67 2111 2404 2907
Latvia 233 268 235 92 75 208 1 10 12 449 635 650
Liechtenstein 4 1 5 6 - 3 1 1 - 2 3 5

European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures

 Workload and output

Applications pending
Applications allocated to Applications disposed of Applications disposed of
before a decision body
State a decision body by decision by judgment
at the end of the year

2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007
Lithuania 267 204 227 444 169 208 5 7 5 376 408 420
Luxembourg 28 32 32 16 17 26 1 2 7 36 48 49
Malta 13 16 17 12 10 3 2 8 1 12 13 24
Moldova 594 517 887 302 248 201 14 20 60 936 1178 1830
Monaco 1 4 10 - 1 1 - - - 1 4 13
Montenegro - 13 134 - - - - - - 133
Netherlands 410 397 365 440 333 335 10 7 10 217 272 296
Norway 58 70 62 53 61 70 - 1 5 93 99 85
Poland 4563 3975 4211 6465 5816 3963 49 115 111 4911 3008 3119

European Court of Human Rights - Some Facts and Figures

Portugal 221 215 133 117 124 169 10 5 10 191 276 214
Romania 3103 3310 3171 2036 2323 2536 33 73 93 6795 7736 8275
Russia 8069 10132 9497 5262 4856 4364 82 102 192 10169 15416 20296
San Marino 4 2 1 2 3 1 1 - 1 6 5 4
Serbia 660 595 1154 384 421 528 - 1 14 730 895 1392
Slovak Republic 442 487 347 283 130 286 29 34 23 818 1142 1176
Slovenia 343 1338 1012 131 226 159 1 190 15 935 1880 2698
Spain 495 361 309 426 284 408 - 5 5 661 734 631
Sweden 449 371 360 391 435 370 7 8 7 425 354 337
Switzerland 230 282 236 178 170 165 5 9 7 289 385 455
"the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" 229 295 454 62 66 60 4 8 17 368 593 980
Turkey 2488 2328 2830 1366 3167 1573 290 334 331 9627 8389 9173
Ukraine 1869 2482 4502 1698 1076 2606 120 120 109 2817 4051 5811
United Kingdom 1003 843 886 732 963 403 18 23 50 1087 948 1363
Total 35369 39336 41717 27612 28162 27057 1105 1560 1503 56795 66516 79427
Minor discrepancies in the totals of applications pending at the end of a year are caused by the operation of the Court’s database and reporting tools which do not provide for

13
an automatic reporting option, in other words, reporting slightly overlaps into the next reference period.
European Court of Human Rights
Council of Europe
67075 Strasbourg-Cedex
France

www.echr.coe.int