The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) consists of 17 judges of the ECtHR and is convened in exceptional cases. Its verdicts cannot be appealed.[1]
The Grand Chamber may be convened either by referral or relinquishment. Referral is based on one of the parties appealing a ruling made by a chamber of the court, but the court only agrees to convene the Grand Chamber in exceptional cases. Relinquishment means that a chamber of the court decides not to hear the case itself but instead leaves the Grand Chamber to hear the case.[1] Until 1 August 2021, when Protocol 15 to the European Convention on Human Rights came into effect, parties to the case had the right to object to relinquishment.[2]
The main function of the Grand Chamber lies in managing the Court's judicial legitimacy — both by improving the quality and consistency of its case law and by providing a higher degree of collective control over its most important judgments.[3]
Recent examples of Grand Chamber jurisprudence include Semenya v. Switzerland (2025), [4] concerning regulations governing eligibility for women's athletic competitions; Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia (2025),[5] concerning human-rights violations arising from the Russo-Ukrainian conflict and the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17); and Yasak v. Türkiye (2026), in which the Grand Chamber found violations of Articles 7 and 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the applicant's conviction and conditions of detention.[6]
References
edit- 1 2 FAQ
- ↑ Talmon, Stefan (22 July 2021). "Relinquishment of jurisdiction contra legem: The European Court of Human Rights' decision in Grzęda v. Poland". EJIL: Talk!. Retrieved 25 September 2021.
- ↑ Kadlec, Ondřej (2025). "Managing Judicial Legitimacy: The Role of Grand Chambers in National and International Courts". International & Comparative Law Quarterly. 74 (3): 619–647. doi:10.1017/S0020589325101115. ISSN 0020-5893.
- ↑ "CASE OF SEMENYA v. SWITZERLAND". HUDOC. Retrieved 11 June 2026.
- ↑ "Case of Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia". Refworld. 8 July 2025. Retrieved 11 June 2026.
- ↑ "Yasak v. Türkiye [GC], no. 17389/20, Judgment of 5 May 2026". HUDOC. European Court of Human Rights. Retrieved 9 June 2026.
Further reading
edit- Bağlayan, Başak; Fahner, Johannes Hendrik (2017). "'One Can Always Do Better': The Referral Procedure before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights". Human Rights Law Review. 17 (2): 339–363. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngx003.
- Bruinsma, Fred J. (2008). "The Room at the Top: Separate Opinions in the Grand Chambers of the ECHR (1998‐2006)". Ancilla Iuris: 32–43.
- Ó Fathaigh, Ronan (4 July 2014). "A Lesson for Applicants: Don't Agree to a Relinquishment to the Grand Chamber (S.A.S. v. France Part 2)". Strasbourg Observers. Retrieved 25 September 2021.
- Bobek, Michal (8 November 2020). "More Heads, More Reason? A Comparative Reflection on the Role of Grand Chambers at National and European Levels". In David Petrlík; Michal Bobek; Jan M.. Passer; Antoine Masson (eds.). Évolution des rapports entre les ordres juridiques de l'Union européenne, international et nationaux: liber amicorum Jiří Malenovský (in English and French). Larcier. pp. 523–550. ISBN 978-2-8027-6686-5. SSRN 3726877 – via Social Science Research Network.
- Kadlec, Ondřej (2025). "Managing Judicial Legitimacy: The Role of Grand Chambers in National and International Courts". International & Comparative Law Quarterly. 74 (3): 619–647. doi:10.1017/S0020589325101115.