Program for international ekspertkonference om implementering af København Erklæringen.

Programme
High-Level Expert Conference
Implementing the Copenhagen
Declaration – An Informal Meeting on
the Convention System
Wednesday 31 October to Friday 2 November 2018
Kokkedal Castle, Denmark
As foreseen in the Copenhagen Declaration, Denmark will host a High-Level Expert
Conference in Kokkedal on 31 October to 2 November 2018.
This will be an opportunity for the States Parties and other stakeholders to follow-up on
the points agreed in the Copenhagen Declaration and to discuss general developments in
the jurisprudence of the Court, with respect for the independence of the Court and the
binding character of its judgments (para. 41 of the Declaration).
The goal is to build further on the constructive dialogue established at the 2017 High-Level
Expert Conference in Kokkedal where representatives of the Council of Europe Member
States met with representatives of the European Court of Human Rights (the Court),
officials of the Council of Europe, national parliamentarians and judges, as well as leading
legal experts from academia and civil society, to address both the immediate problems
facing the Convention system and develop ideas for the long-term future.
The overall purpose of the Conference will be to explore ways to build a common human
rights culture and to facilitate discussions on the caseload challenge and European
supervision.
The programme is comprised of keynote speeches followed by panel discussions with
participation envisaged by speakers, chairs and panel participants. The audience is
encouraged to ask questions and actively participate in the discussions.
In order to encourage a free and open discussion and the sharing of information, the
Conference will be held under the Chatham House Rule.
Europarådet 2018-19
ERD Alm.del Bilag 1
Offentligt
Wednesday 31 October
16:00-18:00 Participants arrive (sandwiches available)
19:00-19:45 Welcome to Kokkedal
Søren Pape Poulsen
Danish Minister of Justice
Guido Raimondi
President of the European Court of Human Rights
Hans-Jörg Behrens
Chair of CDDH
19:45 Reception followed by welcome dinner hosted by the Danish Minister of Justice
Thursday 1 November
07:00-09:00 Breakfast
09:00-09:10 Opening Remarks
Rasmus Kieffer-Kristensen
Head of the Danish ECHR Initiative, Danish Ministry of Justice
09:10-09:45 1a. Building a Common Human Rights Culture: Political Dialogue
post Copenhagen
Facilitator and panel chair: Mikael Rask Madsen
Professor of Law and Director of iCourts, Center of Excellence for International
Courts, University of Copenhagen
Keynote speaker: Armin von Bogdandy
Professor of Law at the University in Frankfurt and Director of the Max Planck
Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law in Heidelberg
09:45-10:45 Panel Discussion
 Mikhail Lobov
 Simon Matthijssen
 Damir Arnaut
10:45-11:15 Photograph followed by coffee/tea break
11:15-11:45 1b. Building a Common Human Rights Culture: Judicial Dialogue
Keynote speaker and panel chair: Lord Jonathan Mance
Former Deputy President of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
11:45-12:30 Panel Discussion
 Arnfinn Bårdsen
 Mattias Kumm
12:30-14:00 Lunch
14:00-14:30 1c. Building a Common Human Rights Culture: Third Party
Interventions
Facilitator and panel chair: Chanaka Wickremasinghe
Agent of the UK before the European Court of Human Rights, Legal Counsellor,
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Keynote speaker: Roderick Liddell
Registrar at the European Court of Human Rights
14:30-15:15 Panel Discussion
 Debbie Kohner
 Chanaka Wickremasinghe
15:15-15:45 Coffee/tea
15:45-16:15 2. The Caseload Challenge Revisited
Facilitator and panel chair: Vít Alexander Schorm
Agent of the Czech Republic before the European Court of Human Rights
Keynote speaker: Hans-Jörg Behrens
Chair of CDDH
16:15-17:00 Panel Discussion
 Roderick Liddell
 Mikael Rask Madsen
19:30 Dinner (informal)
Friday 2 November
07:00-09:00 Breakfast
09:00-10:00 3. European Supervision
Facilitator and panel chair: Jonas Christoffersen
Director of the Danish Institute of Human Rights
Keynote speaker: Laurence Burgorgue-Larsen
Professor of Law at the Sorbonne Law School
10:00-10:30 Coffee/tea
10:30-11:45 Panel Discussion
 Kristīne Līcis
 Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir
11:45-12:00 Closing of Conference
12:00-12:30 Participants departure


High-Level Expert Conference
Panel discussions
Wednesday 31 October to Friday 2 November 2018
Kokkedal Castle, Denmark
Europarådet 2018-19
ERD Alm.del Bilag 1
Offentligt
2
Panel discussions
The Convention today is incorporated, and to a large extent, embedded into the domestic legal order of
the States Parties, and the Court has provided a body of case law interpreting most Convention rights.
This enables the States Parties to play their Convention role of ensuring the protection of human rights
to the full (Copenhagen Declaration, para. 8).
This affects the role of the Court and its case law (e.g. Copenhagen Declaration, paras. 26-32).
This also affects the role and responsibility on Member States underlining the responsibility of national
authorities to guarantee the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention (e.g. Copenhagen Declara-
tion, paras. 12-18).
As mentioned in the Copenhagen Declaration, the most effective means of dealing with human rights
violations is at the national level, and encouraging rights-holders and decision-makers at national levels
to take the lead in upholding Convention standards will increase ownership of and support for human
rights.
The effective implementation of human rights requires a culture of human rights at all levels of govern-
ment as well as in society in general.
1. Building a Common Human Rights Culture
1a. Political dialogue post Copenhagen – anchoring the development of human rights more
solidly in European democracies
The Copenhagen Declaration underlined the need for dialogue at both judicial and political levels, as a
means of ensuring a stronger interaction between the national and European levels of the system (para.
36). As stated in the declaration, for the Convention system to be effective, there must be a construct-
ive and continuous dialogue between the Member States and the Court on their respective roles in the
implementation and development of the Convention system, including the Court's development of the
rights and obligations set out in the Convention. Civil society should be involved in this dialogue. Such
interaction may anchor the development of human rights more solidly in European democracies (para.
33).
However, how do we best support and develop such interaction? In particular, how can a political dia-
logue between the Court, the Member States, civil society and other actors take place without tipping
the balance towards undue political pressure on the Court? While few will disagree that the anchoring
of the system in the European democracies of the Member States is crucial for the long-term authority
of the system, there is less agreement on the ways in which political dialogue can be achieved in a bal-
anced way. This panel focus on identifying ways of improving the dialogue and interaction between the
national and Europeans levels of the system. The panel will also touch upon the key role of national par-
liaments in the realisation of human rights protection within the Convention system.
1b. Judicial dialogue - interaction between the Court and the highest domestic courts
Judicial dialogue and interaction between courts may be a safeguard against the risk of fragmentation
of the Convention system and ensuring common understandings of the Convention. But how is such
dialogue best supported and what challenges may be identified? How does the European Court of Hu-
man Rights use and apply jurisprudence from the highest domestic courts. And to what extent is the
jurisprudence of domestic courts applied before the Court? Likewise, as to the domestic courts: How do
domestic courts actively receive and apply jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights? How
do supreme courts reflect disagreement – if any – with jurisprudence of the European Court of Human
Rights? The recent entry into force of Protocol No. 16 to the European Convention on Human Rights in-
troduces the option for domestic courts to ask the Court for non-binding advisory opinions. How will the
3
Protocol best support the judicial dialogue in practice? And is there a need for other new ways of insti-
tutional dialogue?
1c. Supporting dialogue through third party Interventions
As underlined in the Copenhagen Declaration (para. 34), a key tool for Member States to engage in a
dialogue with the Court is through third-party interventions. Encouraging the Member States, as well as
other stakeholders, to participate in relevant proceedings before the Court, stating their views and pos-
itions can provide a means for strengthening the authority and effectiveness of the Convention system.
The Copenhagen Declaration also presented new ideas on how to develop and facilitate further third
party interventions (paras. 38-40). In this panel, panelists are encouraged to discuss how to implement
these ideas in the most efficient way as well as explore issues related to third party interventions. Can
the Court improve consistency in its communication and determination of time limits for third party inter-
ventions? By what means do Member States identify relevant cases? Moreover, is there any downside
to intervene?
A key question will be what Member States and other stakeholders can do to better coordinate their
participation in important cases, but also how the Court may contribute to this end.
2. The Caseload Challenge Revisited
A framework for the analysis of a balanced caseload
The caseload of the Court remains the top challenge of the Convention system. Following up on the
Copenhagen Declaration para. 54, this panel will explore potential avenues for the forthcoming analy-
sis of the Court’s backlog as agreed in the Copenhagen Declaration. Key questions include: What does
prompt and effective handling of cases mean in practical terms? What is the realistic capacity of the
Court in its current form? Has the Court realistically reached the limit of its output? What kind of cases
can and cannot be handled by the Court in its current form taking case handling time and required quality
into consideration? What solutions could be envisaged in order to develop a Convention system in bal-
ance? What solutions might require profound changes? How can the envisaged analysis be carried out
before the end of 2019?
3. European Supervision
Developments in the fourth instance principle and the doctrine of evolutionary interpretation:
Finding the proper balance
This panel will examine and elaborate on general developments in the Court’s interpretative methods
and doctrines. What are the recent developments with regard to the fourth instance principle – if any?
Has the Court found a proper balance between authoritative interpretation of the Convention and not
acting as a court of fourth instance? Has the Court found appropriate ways of developing the principle
of subsidiarity? How is the Member States’ margin of appreciation affected by the development of the
principle of subsidiarity? Has there been any developments in the Court’s application of the doctrine of
evolutionary interpretation in recent years and after the Copenhagen Declaration? Furthermore, the
panel may address whether the Court has shown restraint. If so, has the restraint gone too far – or not
far enough?