ENTRY INTO FORCE of the European Convention on Human Rights
3 September 1953
Number of implemented cases*
Sweden refused to grant N. asylum despite her claims that she would face gender-based persecution if she was returned to her native Afghanistan. An expulsion order against her was cancelled after the European court ruled that it violated her human rights.
The European Court of Human Rights ruled that people living in a special nature protection area should have had the right to a full legal review of government plans to build a railway close to their homes. Sweden’s highest court has now changed its approach, strengthening people’s right to a legal review when the government makes similar decisions.
Eliza Söderman was 14 when she found out that her stepfather had hidden a secret camera to record her undressing. The police got involved, but the stepfather was cleared of any crime because his actions had not been illegal under Swedish law. The Strasbourg court found that this violated Ms Söderman’s right to privacy. The case highlighted the need for legal reforms.
Surveillance material on five Swedes was collected by the secret services in the 1960s and 1970s. The Strasbourg court ruled that the continued storage of material on four of them had not been justified, and breached their right to privacy. Reforms were made to give people more power over personal information in the government’s possession.
* This figure includes all judgments and decisions from the European Court of Human Rights (including friendly settlements) concerning which the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers has decided that all necessary follow-up measures have been taken. Source: the database of the Department for the Execution of Judgments of the ECHR, HUDOC-EXEC.