NGOs under European Convention on Human Rights / Tymofeyeva

a breach of the Convention rights, it must make a specific claim to that effect. 380 Such a submission should consist of itemised particulars of all claims, together with any relevant supporting documents. The communication must be filed within the time limit set forth for the submission of the applicant’s observations on the merits unless the President of the Chamber directs otherwise. If the applicant fails to comply with these requirements, the Chamber may reject the claims in whole or in part. In addition, the applicant’s claims shall be transmitted to the respondent contracting party to the Convention, which is under obligation to provide comments on it. The detailed description of the rights of the applicant NGOs will be given in the second chapter of this manuscript. The last part of the manuscript will also focus on the conditions for receival of just satisfaction. Now, we will focus on the status of non-governmental organisations in the capacity of amicus curiae or, in other words, the third party. 1.2.2.2 Role of a third party Authorisation to take part in the proceedings Under general rule, the main parties in the individual proceedings before the Court are an applicant and a respondent state. Before the entry into force of Protocol No. 11, this prerogative had also the Commission. 381 Apart from these participants, the procedures under the Convention foresee a possibility of participation in the case of the other subjects as well, called amicus curiae or the third parties. The status of an NGO as a third party in the proceedings can be derived from Article 36, paragraph 2 of the Convention. In accordance with this provision, the President of the Court may invite any person concerned, who is not the applicant, to submit written comments or take part in hearings. Although Article 36 of the Convention does not directly set forth that an NGO specifically may become a third party to the proceedings, this conclusion is confirmed by legal doctrine and practice of the Court. 382 In the manual on the Convention by Jan Capek, the author in his commentaries to Article 36 writes that NGOs may become a third party to the proceedings. 383 He makes reference to the judgment in the case of D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic, 384 where it was noted that Human Rights Watch and the International Centre for the Legal Protection of Human Rights (‘Interights’) took part in the proceeding as interventionists. In paragraph 9 of this judgment, it is stated that the President of the Chamber of the Court, in addition to these two organisations, also permitted the following NGOs to submit written comments: the International Step by Step Association, the Roma Education Fund and the European Early Childhood Research Association, the Minority Rights

380 Cyprus v. Turkey (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 25781/94, § 12, ECHR 2014. 381 1 November 1998. 382 Michaud v. France , no. 12323/11, § 5, ECHR 2012. 383 ČAPEK, J. Evropská úmluva o ochraně lidských práv . I. část, Úmluva, Praha: Linde, 2010, p. 843. 384 D. H. [GC], cited above.

75