The module “The Convention and Practice of the ECHR as a Component of Legislation,” part of the “Positions of the ECHR in Criminal Proceedings” track at the Legal High School’s School of Criminal Practice, continues its work. Alexander Shadrin, a partner at Barristers, LLC, focused on the topic “Preparing a Complaint for Filing with the ECHR: Rules, Grounds, and Procedural and Technical Nuances of Drafting.” 

To file an application with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), you must complete the application form (which can be downloaded from the Court’s website); the most recent changes to the form were made in November 2018. The application may be submitted in any language of the Council of Europe (including Ukrainian or Russian); however, if the application is accepted, further communication will take place in English or French. The fifth page of the form is where you outline the facts of the case. The Court’s website provides guidance on how to complete the application, and the lecturer advised stating the facts concisely and to the point, since the ECHR is not a court of fourth instance. You will be able to describe the circumstances of the case in greater detail later, during the stage when your application is communicated to the government. Mr. Shadrin also recommends not overusing references to ECHR judgments in the application; if you do cite them, limit yourself to only the most essential ones. “The Court itself knows which of its own precedents will be most relevant to the circumstances at hand,” explained Alexander Shadrin.

The lecturer advised against waiting for a decision from the court of cassation (for example, regarding the imposition of a pretrial measure, this is not necessary at all) and, in some cases, to file applications with the ECHR after the appeal decision, since otherwise you may miss the six-month deadline for filing an appeal, since the exhaustion of effective legal remedies may vary depending on the specific articles of the Convention. If the ECHR declares such an application inadmissible on the grounds that all domestic remedies have not been exhausted, a new application may be filed; this is preferable to forfeiting the right to appeal to the European institution. 

Regarding the technical aspects of compiling a list of supporting documents, a partner at Barristers, LLC emphasized that it is not necessary to send the original documents to the ECHR, nor is it necessary to certify them or bind them together; but they must be organized by date of adoption and the relevant issue area. Is it permissible to use double-sided printing? Mr. Shadrin replied that he had successfully used this method and had found no prohibitions in publicly available sources. The ECHR itself uses this method of printing. If the applicant has many supporting documents, they can be organized into groups. In the “Comments” section, you can request that your application be combined with another application (so that the ECHR can see a systemic problem in the country and issue a pilot judgment) or request that your application be considered on a priority basis. The lecturer also shared tips on navigating the Court’s website and conducting searches on the site. 

Mr. Shadrin paid special attention to the procedure for filing a request under Rule 39 of the ECHR Rules of Procedure. Under Rule 39, the Court may order interim (temporary, protective) measures, which are binding on the state. Interim measures are applied only in exceptional cases, for example, when a detainee in a pretrial detention center requires medical care or to prevent extradition to a country where the applicant may face torture or the death penalty. The lawyer often encounters situations where, in response to a request regarding the client’s health, an authorized representative of the pretrial detention center cites medical confidentiality; but after filing a Rule 39 application, one can obtain a detailed and well-reasoned response regarding how the client is being properly treated in the detention center or why such treatment has not been provided or is not possible. Such correspondence with the Court often has a positive impact on national judicial procedures as well.