As a special conference on reforming the European court of human rights (ECHR) gets underway, Britain's Europe minister has stressed the importance of dealing with the backlog of cases at the Strasbourg court.
David Lidington told TheParliament.com that he hoped the 47 members of the Council of Europe would agree on proposals to reform the ECHR, modifying the way the court handles human rights cases.
The conference in Brighton will discuss proposals made by the UK - which currently holds the Council of Europe presidency - and France to reform the ECHR.
He said that negotiations had been "going well", but acknowledged difficulties in reaching consensus among the "very different, disparate countries" nations which make up the Council of Europe.
"I think is a very challenging task but I think it's important that we do make a success [of the reforms]," he said. "It is important for the reputation and the effectiveness of the ECHR that it is able to deal with the massive caseload that it carries."
Lidington added that "the prime responsibility of the ECHR is to hold member states to account for their implementation" of the European convention on human rights.
But he added that it should not "act as a routine further court of appeal for cases that have already been quite properly, legitimately and fairly considered by national courts".
MEPs will also be debating reforms to the ECHR on Thursday 18 April during the plenary session in Strasbourg.
British MEP Michael Cashman, who will be leading the debate for the Socialist and Democrats, accused the UK government of "stripping each one of us of our basic human rights" through the proposed reforms.
"We should never forget that without the judgements of the court, homosexuality might still be criminalised in parts of the EU, and even parts of the UK," said Cashman, who is also president of the European parliament's intergroup on LGBT rights.
He said that Labour MEPs backed certain reforms to the functioning of the ECHR, adding, "We must make the court more efficient in order to alleviate its current heavy workload.
"But many of the reforms put forward by the Tory government this week in Brighton seek to restrict the access of individual citizens to the European court of human rights."
He added, "[UK prime minister] David Cameron should pay greater heed to the existing legal obligations under the convention.
"The number of victims requiring recourse to the court would be significantly reduced if his government properly implemented court judgments", he said.
The European parliament is also expected to discuss the longstanding issue of the EU accession to the European convention on human rights this week.
The EU is obliged to join the European convention under article six of the Lisbon treaty. All EU legislation will be bound to respect it, and an individual will be able to contest it if it violates his or her human rights.
The UK has objected to its accession, amid concerns that it would result in greater powers for the ECHR.
the Parliament
and none for Dave
David Lidington told TheParliament.com that he hoped the 47 members of the Council of Europe would agree on proposals to reform the ECHR, modifying the way the court handles human rights cases.
The conference in Brighton will discuss proposals made by the UK - which currently holds the Council of Europe presidency - and France to reform the ECHR.
He said that negotiations had been "going well", but acknowledged difficulties in reaching consensus among the "very different, disparate countries" nations which make up the Council of Europe.
"I think is a very challenging task but I think it's important that we do make a success [of the reforms]," he said. "It is important for the reputation and the effectiveness of the ECHR that it is able to deal with the massive caseload that it carries."
Lidington added that "the prime responsibility of the ECHR is to hold member states to account for their implementation" of the European convention on human rights.
But he added that it should not "act as a routine further court of appeal for cases that have already been quite properly, legitimately and fairly considered by national courts".
MEPs will also be debating reforms to the ECHR on Thursday 18 April during the plenary session in Strasbourg.
British MEP Michael Cashman, who will be leading the debate for the Socialist and Democrats, accused the UK government of "stripping each one of us of our basic human rights" through the proposed reforms.
"We should never forget that without the judgements of the court, homosexuality might still be criminalised in parts of the EU, and even parts of the UK," said Cashman, who is also president of the European parliament's intergroup on LGBT rights.
He said that Labour MEPs backed certain reforms to the functioning of the ECHR, adding, "We must make the court more efficient in order to alleviate its current heavy workload.
"But many of the reforms put forward by the Tory government this week in Brighton seek to restrict the access of individual citizens to the European court of human rights."
He added, "[UK prime minister] David Cameron should pay greater heed to the existing legal obligations under the convention.
"The number of victims requiring recourse to the court would be significantly reduced if his government properly implemented court judgments", he said.
The European parliament is also expected to discuss the longstanding issue of the EU accession to the European convention on human rights this week.
The EU is obliged to join the European convention under article six of the Lisbon treaty. All EU legislation will be bound to respect it, and an individual will be able to contest it if it violates his or her human rights.
The UK has objected to its accession, amid concerns that it would result in greater powers for the ECHR.
the Parliament
and none for Dave
However, the fact that the tories are whining about powers ceded to the ECHR and not, say, the loss of autonomy when it comes to setting a country's financial policy (e.g. what's happened to Greece and what was threatened to happen to the UK if we didn't make cuts) suggests that they are less interested in the right of nation states and by extent those states' citizens to choose their country's policies and more interested in rolling back EU mandated protections for vulnerable groups.