Russia's take on the territorial application of the ECHR

It is very rare for Contracting States of the European Convention (ECHR) to be brought before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) by other Contracting States. The case of Georgia v Russia (no. 2) is one of those rare occasions.

The case concerns allegations by Georgia that Russian military forces conducted "indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks agains civils and their property" in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, two autonomous regions of Georgia.

The case is very interesting, not only because it concerns the application of the Convention in times of war, but also because it adresses the issue of the territorial applicability of the Convention. The ECtHR has previously held that the Convention does not only apply within the territory of the Contracting Parties, but within the jurisdiction, i.e. where they have effective control (see, most prominently, Loizidou v Turkey, (preliminary objections), para 62).

The Russian delegation argues that the Convention is not applicable for territorial reasons, but also because humanitarian law should apply to the armed conflict, not human rights law. This line of argumentation is countered very persuasively by the legal counsel of Georgia, Ben Emmerson, as can be seen in this webcast (go to 'Government' in the drop-down list).