CYIL vol. 13 (2022)

ARMEN HARUTYUNYAN CYIL 13 ȍ2022Ȏ known politicians. Jafarov, Kavala, Aliyev, and Yunusova are members of civil society and human rights defenders. Ismayilova is a journalist.” 54 These judgments primarily concern countries in which the weak state of the rule of law and numerous violations of human rights protections are systematically documented by members of the civil society, the Commissioner for Human Rights, as well as the Venice Commission. 55 In a number of cases, politicians belonging to the political opposition were targeted by the state. For example in the Tymoshenko and Merabishvili cases, the applicants were former Prime Ministers and leaders of the leading opposition parties in the country. 56 In the Navalnyy 57 and Selahattin Demirtaş No. 2. 58 cases, the applicants were also leaders of the political opposition. 4.2 Merabishvili judgment and its legal implications In the 2017 Merabishvili v. Georgia judgment, the Court established how to approach co-existing legitimate and illegitimate aims, and how to prove the existence of an illegitimate one. In this case the Court changed its position to tolerate measures having mixed purpose. The case Merabishvili v. Georgia concerned the arrest and pre-trial detention of opposition politician Merabishvili. He complained that there had been ulterior purposes behind his arrest and pre-trial detention. Merabishvili namely he alleged that the actions of Georgian authorities aimed to remove him from the political scene. The Court found a violation of Article 18 in conjunction with Article 5(1). However, the legal value of judgment is beyond this single case of violation. The Court used this opportunity to clarify its position on the use of Article 18, in particular, advance the test of ulterior purpose/plurality of purposes and create a totally new standard of proof. The Grand Chamber established that the concept of ‘plurality of purposes’ means that the Court must determine which was the predominant purpose among several possible purposes of government actions by evaluating all of the circumstances and if it is determined that the 54 CALI, B. ‘How Loud Do the Alarm Bells Toll? Execution of ‘Article 18 Judgments’ of the European Court of Human Rights’, (2) European Convention on Human Rights Law Review 2, (2021) , p. 280. 55 See, inter alia, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Azerbaijan Should Release All Persons Detained Because of Their Views Expressed or Legitimate Civic Activity’ (17 May 2017): Azerbaijan should release all persons detained because of their views expressed or legitimate civic activity – View (coe.int), Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Commissioner’s Statement on Developments Affecting the Work of Human Rights Defenders and Civil Society in Turkey’ (20 November 2018): Commissioner’s statement on developments affecting the work of human rights defenders and civil society in Turkey – View (coe.int) , Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘The Law on Freedom of Assembly in the Russian Federation Needs Thorough Revision’ (29 September 2017): The law on freedom of assembly in the Russian Federation needs thorough revision – View (coe.int). (Last accessed 14.09.2022). 56 Tymoshenko v Ukraine (Application No. 49872/11), Judgment of 30 April 2013; Merabishvili v Georgia (n 4), ECtHR (GC) Application No. 72508/13, Judgment of 28 November 2017. 57 Navalnyy v. Russia , ECtHR (GC) Application Nos. 29580/12, 36847/12, 11252/13, 12317/13 and 43746/14, Merits and Just Satisfaction, Judgment of 15 November 2018. See also TAN, F. ‘The European Court’s Role as Warden of Democracy and the Rule of Law: Navalnyy v Russia’ ( ECHR Blog , 27 November 2018)

136