NGOs under European Convention on Human Rights / Tymofeyeva

The practice of representation of an applicant by NGOs is quite common. For example, in the case of Y.D. v. the United Kingdom, 415 the applicant was represented by Vereen Jones of the Leicester Rights Centre. In the above-mentioned case of D. H. and Others v. the Czech Republic, 416 the interest of the applicant was represented by, inter alia , the European Roma Rights Centre. In the case of Bureš v. the Czech Republic, 417 four lawyers belonging to the Brno branch of the Mental Disability Advocacy Centre represented the petitioner. The judgment in the case of I. G. and Others v. Slovakia 418 shows that lawyers collaborating with the Centre Civil and Human Rights, an NGO based in Košice, conducted the legal representation of the applicant. Some human rights NGOs are very active in representing persons before the Court. In the case of Imakayeva v. Russia, 419 the Court provided the applicant with legal assistance, and the applicant was represented by lawyers from the Stichting Russian Justice Initiative (hereinafter also referred to as the ‘RJI’), an NGO based in the Netherlands with representative offices in Russia. Figures found on the website of the RJI show that this organisation lodged more than 390 complaints with the Court concerning the North Caucasus and in more than one hundred cases, the Court ruled in favour of the applicants represented by this NGO. 420 According to the research, carried out by Lloyd H. Mayer, 421 references to the participation of the RJI can be found in 20 percent of the total number of cases against Russia, in which NGOs acted before the Court, either in a representative capacity, as the applicant or as a third party. This figure proves that the NGOs in the capacity of a representative can indeed be a powerful tool influencing the human rights defence in the region. Organisations in Moldova also play a leading role in representation before the Court. The research reveals that the Lawyers for Human Rights and the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights together participate in ninety percent of cases with NGO participation against Moldova. 422 The NGO acting in the capacity of a representative is not obliged to have legal staff practicing in the country against which the complaint is submitted, nor even staff from the CoE member states. In the case of D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic, the Court allowed representation of the applicants “by the European Roma Rights Centre based in Budapest, Lord Lester of Herne Hill, QC, Mr J. Goldston, of the New York Bar…” 423

415 Y.D. v. the United Kingdom , application no. 15867/89; 7 May 1990. 416 D. H. [GC], cited above. 417 Bureš , cited above, § 5. 418 I. G. , cited above, § 5. 419 Imakayeva v. Russia , no. 7615/02, § 2, ECHR 2006-XIII (extracts). 420 Information is valid on 17 June 2015. See: http://srji.home.pl/legal/cases. 421 MAYER, cited above. 422 Ibid. 423 D. H. [GC], cited above, § 2.

80