Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Statements Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
Default title
04 November 2000
Share
European Convention on Human Rights
Rome
4 November 2000
Address of the High Commissioner for Human Rights,
Mary Robinson
Excellencies,
Distinguished Guests,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a pleasure for me to participate in this event to mark the 50th anniversary of the signature of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The struggle to champion and defend human rights is long and hard with many setbacks along the way. Therefore, landmarks on the road to greater respect for human rights should be recognised. Today’s event certainly qualifies under that heading.
The European Convention has been a success story. Big strides have been made in developing effective mechanisms to protect human rights in Europe. But we should temper any rejoicing by bearing in mind how far we are from truly realising all human rights for all. Two years ago, at the ceremonies for the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, I said that it was an occasion to mark rather than to celebrate. I feel the same way about the European Convention of Human Rights.
Being from Ireland, I take special pride in the role played in the early days of the Council of Europe and the drawing up of the Convention by my compatriot Sean MacBride. As President of the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers from 1949 to 1950, Sean MacBride was present at and involved in the negotiations which produced the European Convention on Human Rights. We should pay particular tribute today to such visionary figures as Robert Schuman and Rene Cassin who worked so hard for this result. And here in Rome I would like to mention those great fighters for human rights Carlo Sforza and Paolo Barile.
The impulse to conclude the European Convention was the same as that which motivated the drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: to devise a set of principles and rules which would protect the rights of every individual. It formed part of a resolve in Europe to learn lessons from the terrible conflicts that disfigured the continent in the first half of the twentieth century and to embed a culture of democracy and respect for the dignity of the individual. As the Preamble makes clear, the European Convention was deeply influenced by the Universal Declaration.
The value and durability of the European Convention on Human Rights have been proved by the number of States which have incorporated its provisions into their domestic law over the past 50 years. The basic articles have been supplemented by a series of Protocols, providing for further rights, modifying the procedures of the Commission and Court and covering such vital areas as the death penalty. As the introductory report of the Secretary General puts it, “The Convention has acquired such an established and fundamental place in the European legal order that it has appropriately been described as a constitutional instrument of European public order.”
The Convention and Court have also played a key role in increasing human rights awareness and in the promotion and protection of human rights in new and aspiring member states of the Council of Europe. I believe that this influence will continue to be felt in the greatly expanded Council, and it will be important to deepen further the human rights friendly environment in which the Court exercises jurisdiction, and to stress the importance of adhering to and implementing its judgements.
Three features of the Convention are particularly noteworthy: firstly, the requirement on States wishing to join the Council of Europe to uphold the European Convention on Human Rights. Secondly, the Convention’s effective control machinery which allows individuals claiming that their rights have been violated to appeal to a supranational court. This sets the Convention apart from many international human rights treaties. A third significant aspect is the power of the Court to hear inter-State complaints.
The obligation on governments to observe the rights enshrined in the Convention has been a powerful instrument in setting standards and shaping societies in the member states. The effects may in many cases have been less visible in that governments have been deterred from infringing rights covered by the Convention and conflicts have only become public in instances such as derogation or the threat of suspension. But the impact of the Convention on the evolution of European legislation and society must be regarded as very significant.
The decisions of the Court on individual cases have resulted in a substantive jurisprudence steadily built up over the past fifty years. Many landmark judgements have been made – on torture, on the treatment of prisoners, criminal laws against homosexuality, freedom of the press, corporal punishment, the rights of the mentally ill and the equal status of children in families, to mention just some examples.
I recall when I was practicing as a young lawyer the impact which Strasbourg rulings had on the legal system in Ireland. Ireland was one of the first signatories of the Convention and the first to give permanent and unconditional right of petition. The possibility of taking a case on an important issue of law to the European Commission and Court was a most valuable option. The Court represented the outer limit of the legal possibilities and I can personally attest to the impact it had on Irish jurisprudence.
Today I see the Convention and the Court from a different perspective. As United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights I feel some concern about the future of these institutions, representing as they do what are probably the most effective human rights enforcement mechanisms in existence. The Council of Europe has changed radically from 10 member states to the current membership of 41. Its remit has expanded to a total population of some 800 million people. The demands being placed on the Court have risen sharply. I understand that the number of individual petitions pending before the Court at the admissibility stage was 2,000 a decade ago, whereas today the number is 15,000.
Like all institutions concerned with protecting human rights, the Court must have the resources to do the job. I think I can speak with authority on the need to have adequate resources to defend human rights! Member States of the Council of Europe should ensure that the Court is given all the resources it needs to carry out its vital work.
It is appropriate that today’s ceremony coincides with a further step on the normative front: the opening for signature of Protocol No. 12 which provides for a general prohibition of discrimination. The new Protocol extends the remit of Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights to prohibit discrimination on any ground by a public authority. I believe that this will strengthen the Court’s hand in combating discrimination.
This Protocol has particular relevance in that the preparations for the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance are now well under way. As Secretary General of the Conference, which will be held in Durban, South Africa, from 31 August to 7 September next, I see in this event a unique opportunity to re-vitalise the struggle against racism and xenophobia in Europe and in every part of the world.
The first of a series of regional conferences to prepare for the World Conference was organised in Strasbourg last month with the efficiency which has come to be expected of the Council of Europe. I said then that the Council of Europe had a good record in that it has overseen the holding of major conferences on racism in Europe in Vienna in1993 and in Strasbourg in 1997. The European Youth campaign against Racism and the European Year against Racism have engaged public attention on issues of discrimination and intolerance while the reports of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance permit countries to measure progress and set targets.
But racism and prejudice persist in Europe as elsewhere. I see it as vital that we use the occasion of next year’s World Conference to devise effective strategies against racism. The more I see of gross human rights violations in the world, the more I am convinced that racism and xenophobia are often root causes of such violations and of many conflict situations. I call on all present, and particularly government representatives, to engage actively in the preparations for the World Conference so that we can together produce a ringing declaration against racism and a focused platform of action with a mechanism for review.
Today is a day to salute the far-sightedness of those who founded the Council of Europe and drew up the European Convention on Human Rights. The best tribute we can pay to their vision is to carry the work forward and do our utmost to ensure that the Convention continues to be a strong force for the protection of human rights throughout Europe.
Thank you.
Rome
4 November 2000
Address of the High Commissioner for Human Rights,
Mary Robinson
Excellencies,
Distinguished Guests,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a pleasure for me to participate in this event to mark the 50th anniversary of the signature of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The struggle to champion and defend human rights is long and hard with many setbacks along the way. Therefore, landmarks on the road to greater respect for human rights should be recognised. Today’s event certainly qualifies under that heading.
The European Convention has been a success story. Big strides have been made in developing effective mechanisms to protect human rights in Europe. But we should temper any rejoicing by bearing in mind how far we are from truly realising all human rights for all. Two years ago, at the ceremonies for the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, I said that it was an occasion to mark rather than to celebrate. I feel the same way about the European Convention of Human Rights.
Being from Ireland, I take special pride in the role played in the early days of the Council of Europe and the drawing up of the Convention by my compatriot Sean MacBride. As President of the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers from 1949 to 1950, Sean MacBride was present at and involved in the negotiations which produced the European Convention on Human Rights. We should pay particular tribute today to such visionary figures as Robert Schuman and Rene Cassin who worked so hard for this result. And here in Rome I would like to mention those great fighters for human rights Carlo Sforza and Paolo Barile.
The impulse to conclude the European Convention was the same as that which motivated the drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: to devise a set of principles and rules which would protect the rights of every individual. It formed part of a resolve in Europe to learn lessons from the terrible conflicts that disfigured the continent in the first half of the twentieth century and to embed a culture of democracy and respect for the dignity of the individual. As the Preamble makes clear, the European Convention was deeply influenced by the Universal Declaration.
The value and durability of the European Convention on Human Rights have been proved by the number of States which have incorporated its provisions into their domestic law over the past 50 years. The basic articles have been supplemented by a series of Protocols, providing for further rights, modifying the procedures of the Commission and Court and covering such vital areas as the death penalty. As the introductory report of the Secretary General puts it, “The Convention has acquired such an established and fundamental place in the European legal order that it has appropriately been described as a constitutional instrument of European public order.”
The Convention and Court have also played a key role in increasing human rights awareness and in the promotion and protection of human rights in new and aspiring member states of the Council of Europe. I believe that this influence will continue to be felt in the greatly expanded Council, and it will be important to deepen further the human rights friendly environment in which the Court exercises jurisdiction, and to stress the importance of adhering to and implementing its judgements.
Three features of the Convention are particularly noteworthy: firstly, the requirement on States wishing to join the Council of Europe to uphold the European Convention on Human Rights. Secondly, the Convention’s effective control machinery which allows individuals claiming that their rights have been violated to appeal to a supranational court. This sets the Convention apart from many international human rights treaties. A third significant aspect is the power of the Court to hear inter-State complaints.
The obligation on governments to observe the rights enshrined in the Convention has been a powerful instrument in setting standards and shaping societies in the member states. The effects may in many cases have been less visible in that governments have been deterred from infringing rights covered by the Convention and conflicts have only become public in instances such as derogation or the threat of suspension. But the impact of the Convention on the evolution of European legislation and society must be regarded as very significant.
The decisions of the Court on individual cases have resulted in a substantive jurisprudence steadily built up over the past fifty years. Many landmark judgements have been made – on torture, on the treatment of prisoners, criminal laws against homosexuality, freedom of the press, corporal punishment, the rights of the mentally ill and the equal status of children in families, to mention just some examples.
I recall when I was practicing as a young lawyer the impact which Strasbourg rulings had on the legal system in Ireland. Ireland was one of the first signatories of the Convention and the first to give permanent and unconditional right of petition. The possibility of taking a case on an important issue of law to the European Commission and Court was a most valuable option. The Court represented the outer limit of the legal possibilities and I can personally attest to the impact it had on Irish jurisprudence.
Today I see the Convention and the Court from a different perspective. As United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights I feel some concern about the future of these institutions, representing as they do what are probably the most effective human rights enforcement mechanisms in existence. The Council of Europe has changed radically from 10 member states to the current membership of 41. Its remit has expanded to a total population of some 800 million people. The demands being placed on the Court have risen sharply. I understand that the number of individual petitions pending before the Court at the admissibility stage was 2,000 a decade ago, whereas today the number is 15,000.
Like all institutions concerned with protecting human rights, the Court must have the resources to do the job. I think I can speak with authority on the need to have adequate resources to defend human rights! Member States of the Council of Europe should ensure that the Court is given all the resources it needs to carry out its vital work.
It is appropriate that today’s ceremony coincides with a further step on the normative front: the opening for signature of Protocol No. 12 which provides for a general prohibition of discrimination. The new Protocol extends the remit of Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights to prohibit discrimination on any ground by a public authority. I believe that this will strengthen the Court’s hand in combating discrimination.
This Protocol has particular relevance in that the preparations for the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance are now well under way. As Secretary General of the Conference, which will be held in Durban, South Africa, from 31 August to 7 September next, I see in this event a unique opportunity to re-vitalise the struggle against racism and xenophobia in Europe and in every part of the world.
The first of a series of regional conferences to prepare for the World Conference was organised in Strasbourg last month with the efficiency which has come to be expected of the Council of Europe. I said then that the Council of Europe had a good record in that it has overseen the holding of major conferences on racism in Europe in Vienna in1993 and in Strasbourg in 1997. The European Youth campaign against Racism and the European Year against Racism have engaged public attention on issues of discrimination and intolerance while the reports of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance permit countries to measure progress and set targets.
But racism and prejudice persist in Europe as elsewhere. I see it as vital that we use the occasion of next year’s World Conference to devise effective strategies against racism. The more I see of gross human rights violations in the world, the more I am convinced that racism and xenophobia are often root causes of such violations and of many conflict situations. I call on all present, and particularly government representatives, to engage actively in the preparations for the World Conference so that we can together produce a ringing declaration against racism and a focused platform of action with a mechanism for review.
Today is a day to salute the far-sightedness of those who founded the Council of Europe and drew up the European Convention on Human Rights. The best tribute we can pay to their vision is to carry the work forward and do our utmost to ensure that the Convention continues to be a strong force for the protection of human rights throughout Europe.
Thank you.