Justice transitionnelle et protection des droits de l'homme en Europe

Le spectre de conflits violents et de dictatures continue de hanter plusieurs régions et pays d’Europe, ce qui prive de nombreux Européens de la pleine jouissance des droits de l'homme, de la démocratie et de l’Etat de droit. Une instabilité persistante, de profonds clivages, le manque de ressources et le dysfonctionnement des institutions rendent très difficile, pour les Etats, de progresser sur la voie de la réconciliation et de la paix.

Il y a certes plusieurs moyens de traiter des violations graves des droits de l'homme, passées ou en cours, mais l’histoire montre qu’une solution n’est durable que si elle repose sur la justice, la réparation, la vérité et la garantie de non-récurrence.

Quelles que soient les mesures de justice transitionnelle choisies par un Etat, elles doivent toujours être conformes aux normes européennes des droits de l'homme, notamment à celles qui émanent de la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme et de la jurisprudence de la Cour de Strasbourg.

Lors de ses visites dans les différents pays et grâce à son dialogue permanent avec les autorités nationales et la société civile, le Commissaire prend acte des progrès accomplis. Il identifie aussi les lacunes qui restent à combler et conseille les Etats membres sur les moyens de garantir le respect des droits de l'homme dans le cadre des processus de justice transitionnelle.

Resources

Selected case-law of the European Court of Human Rights
  • Vasiliauskas v. Lithuania – Grand Chamber judgment of 20 October 2015 about the foreseeability of a conviction for genocide for the killing of two Lithuanian partisans in 1953
  • Perinçek v. Switzerland – Grand Chamber judgment of 15 October 2015 concerning a criminal conviction for statements made about the massacre and deportation of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire in 1915 (as well as reviewing the Court’s case-law concerning Holocaust denial)
  • Ališić and others v. BiH, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia and “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” - Grand Chamber final judgment of 16 July 2014, concerning to non-payment of ‘old savings’ accounts denominated in foreign currency
  • Zornić v. Bosnia and Herzegovina - judgment of 15 July 2014, concerning ineligibility to stand for election to the second chamber of the State parliament and to the collective Head of State
  • Jelić v. Croatia - jugment of 12 June 2014, concerning no adequate investigation into the death of husband killed by the Croatian police
  • Marguš v. Croatia - final judgment of 27 May 2014, concerning the application of amnesty on a war-related crimes case
  • Gürtekin and Others v. Cyprus, inadmissibility decision of 11 March 2014 about the Cyprus authorities’ decision to close a fresh investigation into killings carried out during intercommunal conflicts in Cyprus in 1963-1964
  • Maktouf and Damjanović v. BiH - Grand Chamber judgment of 18 July 2013, concerning the retroactive application of criminal law laying down heavier sentences for wartime crimes than the law in force when the crimes were committed
  • Kurić and others v. Slovenia - Grand Chamber judgment of 26 June 2012, concerning the ‘erased' persons
  • Janowiec and others v. Russia - Grand Chamber judgment of 21 October 2013, concerning missing persons in the Katyn case
  • Palić v. Bosnia and Herzegovina - judgment of 15 February 2011, concerning a state's procedural obligation to investigate into a case of missing person
  • Jularić v. Croatia - judgment of 20 January 2011, concerning inadequate and ineffective investigation into the circumstances surrounding the killing of the applicant's husband
  • Skendžić and Krznarić v. Croatia - judgment of 20 January 2011, concerning ineffectiveness and the lack of independence of the authorities involved in investigating the disappearance of the applicants' close relative
  • Đokić v. BiH - final judgment of 4 October 2010, concerning the right of the applicant, a former member of the armed forces of the former Yugoslavia, to regain the possession and register the ownership of his pre-war apartment in the Federation of BiH
  • Čolic and others v. BIH - final judgment of 28 June 2010, concerning the non-enforcement of final domestic court decisions ordering payment of war damages
  • Kononov v. Latvia – Grand Chamber judgment of 17 May 2010 about a conviction under legislation introduced in 1993 for war crimes committed during the Second World War
  • Sejdić and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina - Grand Chamber judgment of 22 December 2009, concerning the applicants' ineligibility to stand for election to the House of Peoples and the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina on the ground of their Roma and Jewish origin
  • Radanović v. Croatia - final judgment of 21 March 2007, concerning the applicant’s right to her property which was allocated for use to another person during the war in Croatia
Documents by the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers 
PACE resolutions and recommendations relating to the post-conflict justice 
Council of Europe treaties 

Autes ressources

* All reference to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions or population, in this text shall be understood in full compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.