The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is facing scrutiny as nearly half of its judges lack prior judicial experience in their home countries. this revelation has sparked concerns about the court's legitimacy and the quality of its rulings, with critics questioning the influence of foreign academics, diplomats, and civil servants on policy-making.

19 of 44 ECHR Judges Have No Prior Judicial Experience

An analysis of the ECHR's judges reveals that 19 out of 44 justices had no prior judicial experience upon joining the Strasbourg-based court full-time. Among them were career academics,civil servants, and diplomats with no experience of presiding over a case. Furthermore, two of the 46 judges, representing each of the member countries, were designated 'ad hoc' judges despite having no previous judicial experience in their countries.

Lord Blencathra, a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe,expressed concern about the quality of judges, stating that some of them had never tried a case in their lives and would struggle to teach in some of the worst polytechnic universities. He also questioned the credibility of the court's rulings, comparing its judges to those of the UK's Supreme Court.

Controversial Decisions and Corruption Allegations

The ECHR has been linked to controversial decisions that have sparked debates, questioned decisions made by the UK government, raised corruption allegations, and caused a stir over litigation rules. In April 2024, the court sparked controversy by ruling that Switzerland had violated the human rights of its citizens by not taking sufficient action aggainst climate change. In June 2022, it blocked the UK's deportation scheme for illegal migrants and foreign criminals due to a 11th-hour interim injunction issued by an unknown judge.

Additionally, ECHR judges must be proposed by member nations and voted on by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Currently, Sir Keir Starmer's government is signaling a 'political declaration' aimed at limiting the ECHR's effect on illegal migrants and foreign criminals.

Reforms and Brexit Threaten ECHR's Future

The ECHR's future is threatened by potential Brexit, with reforms being pursued to limit the court's jurisdiction to decrease illegal migrations and foreign criminal enforcement. however, critics argue that previous declarations have had limited impact, and the treaty's text remains unchanged.

According to the report, the ECHR's legitimacy is being questioned due to the lack of judicial experience among its judges. The court's controversial decisions and the influence of non-judicial professionals have raised concerns about its credibility and the quality of its rulings.

Who is Appointing These Judges?

One of the key questions raised by the report is who is appointing these judges and what criteria are being used. The report suggests that the appointment process may be influenced by political considerations rather than judicial merit.

As the report notes, the ECHR's judges are proposed by member nations and voted on by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. this process may be contributing to the lack of judicial experience among the court's judges.