EIT sovelsi ensimmäisen kerran uutta vähäisyyskriteeriä

Euroopan ihmisoikeustuomioistuin (EIT) on tehnyt ensimmäisen päätöksen, jossa se on soveltanut uutta 14. lisäpöytäkirjan suomaa mahdollisuutta jättää tutkimatta valitus, jossa valittajan ei katsota kärsineen "huomattavaa haittaa".

The Court noted at the outset that these complaints were not incompatible with the provisions of the Convention, manifestly ill-founded or an abuse of the right of application. However, since the entry into force of Protocol No. 14 to the Convention on 1 June 2010, a new admissibility criterion was applicable: an application is inadmissible where “the applicant has not suffered a significant disadvantage, unless respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto requires an examination of the application on the merits and provided that no case may be rejected on this ground which has not been duly considered by a domestic tribunal”. The Court considered it necessary to examine of its own motion whether the present case fell into this category.

It examined, firstly, whether the applicant had suffered any significant disadvantage (the main aspect of the new criterion). This was not the case, since the alleged financial loss was limited (90 euros, according to Mr Ionescu) and there was no evidence that the applicant’s financial circumstances were such that the outcome of the case would have had a significant effect on his personal life.

Secondly, it examined whether respect for human rights required an examination of the application on the merits. The answer was again negative, since the relevant legal provisions had been repealed, and the issue before the Court was therefore of historical interest only.

Lastly, the Court noted that the case had been “duly considered” on the merits by a tribunal, namely the Bucharest Court of First Instance.

The three conditions of the new admissibility criterion had therefore been satisfied.

Accordingly, the Court, by a majority, declared the application inadmissible.

EIT:n päätös asiassa Mihai Ionescu v. Romania

Palaa otsikoihin