European Court of Human Rights - Elberte v. Latvia - Application no. 61243/08

giurisprudenza e prassi internazionale - international case-law and practice

Data – Date :

13/01/2015

Note – Notes:

Ruling:
The Court, unanimously:
1. Joins to the merits the Government’s objections that the applicant’s complaint under Article 3 is incompatible ratione materiae and ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention and dismisses them
2. Declares the applicant’s complaint under Article 8, in so far as it relates to the removal of her deceased husband’s tissue without her consent, and the complaint under Article 13 admissible and the remainder of the complaint under Article 8 of the Convention inadmissible;
3. Declares the applicant’s complaint under Article 3 admissible;
4. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention;5. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention;6. Holds that there is no need to examine the complaint under Article 13 of the Convention;7. Holds (a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, the following amounts:
(i) EUR 16,000 (sixteen thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage;
(ii) EUR 500 (five hundred euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant, in respect of costs and expenses;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points;
8. Dismisses the remainder of the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction.

Reference to obligations of criminalization:

Indirect reference made in Article 1 of the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine.

Reference to human dignity:
Par. 60. The applicant complained in substance under Article 8 of the Convention, firstly, that the removal of tissue from her husband’s body had been carried out without his or the applicant’s prior consent. Secondly, she complained that ‒ in the absence of such consent ‒ his dignity, identity and integrity had been breached and his body had been treated disrespectfully.
Par. 133
115. Treatment is considered to be ‘degrading’ within the meaning of Article 3 when it humiliates or debases an individual, showing a lack of respect for, or diminishing, his or her human dignity, or when it arouses feelings of fear, anguish or inferiority capable of breaking an individual’s moral and physical resistance.
118 Respect for human dignity forms part of the very essence of the Convention.
Par. 142; … The object of these treaties is to protect the dignity, identity and integrity of “everyone” who has been born, whether now living or dead (see paragraph 37 above). As cited in paragraph 133 above, respect for human dignity forms part of the very essence of the Convention; treatment is considered “degrading” within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention when, inter alia, it humiliates an individual, showing a lack of respect for human dignity.

Norme penali italiane rilevanti – Relevant italian rules:

Arts. 3, 8 and 34 ECHR
Arts. 1-16-17-18 Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine

Parole chiave – Keywords:

Corte Europea dei Diritti Umani - European Court Of Human Rights, Giurisdizione - Jurisdiction, Obbligo di Incriminazione Implicito - Implicit Criminalization Obligation, Trattato - Treaty