NGOs under European Convention on Human Rights / Tymofeyeva

the other instruments. The analysis of this international treaty allows us to define four main roles or capacities, in which NGOs may take part in the proceedings before the Court: applicant (Article 34 of the Convention), 18 third party (Article 36 of the Convention), 19 representative (Rule 36 of the Rules of Court), 20 and information provider (Article 46 of the Convention). 21 Each of these roles are described in the book separately with reference to both their rights and the duties in the course of the trial. The author makes a comparison of the features of the NGOs in each of these capacities. Special attention is paid to the expression ‘non-governmental organisation’ in the text of Article 34 of the Convention and its interpretation in the case-law of the Court. On the basis of the study of the judgments and decisions of this Court, it becomes clear, for instance, that political parties and business entities are characterised by the Court as non-governmental organisations. At the end of the Chapter, the author provides a definition of an NGO within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention for the purposes of the current research, giving it the title, ‘Article 34 NGO’. 22 The proposed title is derived from the comparison of the use of this term in Article 34, the other provisions of the Convention and the diverse sources of international law. Moreover, this definition is of importance as the following Chapters of the book are primarily devoted to NGOs in the capacity of an applicant. The Second Chapter is the most extensive and examines all the possible rights and freedoms envisaged in the Convention that are applicable to non-governmental organisations as confirmed by the Court’s case-law. It is divided into two main parts: the rights envisaged in the Convention itself and the rights set forth in the Protocols to it. Although the author is aware of the fact that the material rights established in the Protocols to the Convention are an integral part of the Convention’s rights, she nevertheless created these two groups in order to make the book more coherent and comprehensible. The first section of this chapter provides a general overview of these human rights and then each of the following sections describes a theory and the Court’s case-law in respect of NGOs within the meaning of Article 34 of 18 Savez crkava “Riječ života” and Others v. Croatia , no. 7798/08, 9 December 2010; Centro Europa 7 S.R.L. and di Stefano v. Italy [GC], no. 38433/09, ECHR 2012; Russian Conservative Party of Entrepreneurs and Others v. Russia , nos. 55066/00 and 55638/00, 11 January 2007 and Radio France and Others v. France , no. 53984/00, ECHR 2004-II. 19 PETA Deutschland v. Germany , no. 43481/09, § 5, 8 November 2012; Mouvement raëlien suisse v. Switzerland [GC], no. 16354/06, § 8, ECHR 2012 (extracts); M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, ECHR 2011 and Sindicatul “Păstorul cel Bun” v. Romania [GC], no. 2330/09, § 8, 9 July 2013. 20 D. H. and Others v. the Czech Republic [GC], no. 57325/00, ECHR 2007-IV; Bureš v. the Czech Republic , no. 37679/08, § 5, 18 October 2012; I.G. and Others v. Slovakia , no. 15966/04, § 5, 13 November 2012 and Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine, no. 21722/11, § 2, ECHR 2013. 21 Abdulkhakov v. Russia , no. 14743/11, 2 October 2012; I.K. v. Austria , no. 2964/12, 28 March 2013; Savriddin Dzhurayev v. Russia , no. 71386/10, 25 April 2013 and El Masri v. “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” [GC], no. 39630/09, ECHR 2012. 22 In giving this title, the author was inspired by an NGO “Article 19”. This organisation specifies: “We take our name from Article 19 of the UDHR”. See URL: accessed 1 August 2015.

15