Explain and analyse the reforms of the complaint system under the European Convention on Human Rights.

In the introduction, explain the issue and set out how the essay will answer the question. The essay could raise the point that the changes will highlight the debate on the role of the court.

Structure the essay to answer question in a clear manner (this is not the only way it can be done, as long as the argument makes sense):

• Background:  this may discuss the need to make changes made in protocol 11 and protocol 14 – large numbers of applications to the Court (figures) causing a backlog and reasons for this:  growth of Council of Europe (after the end of the Cold War), greater awareness and use of Court
• Protocol 11: relevant changes. Why more change needed after Protocol 11?
• Protocol 14: changes:
• One judge formation for admissibility (criticisms, safeguards etc. role of court – individual redress or supervision)
• Three judge committee for repetitive claims (criticisms, safeguards etc. role of court – individual redress or supervision)
• ‘Significant disadvantage’ Criterion for admissibility (criticisms, safeguards etc. role of court – individual redress or supervision)
• Other changes? Infringement proceedings, judiciary etc., use of pilot judgments
• Has P14 made a difference? Has it reduced the caseload?
• On-going reform – Interlaken process and Council of Europe discussions – changes made by Protocol 15 and advisory opinion under Protocol 16, The issue of subsidiarity and cooperation/dialogue

The essay should use the arguments of academics, relevant case law and reports (such as Council of Europe Committee reports and Conferences).

Conclusions: This should bring the arguments together and evaluate the reforms. If the changes are designed to improve the effectiveness of court, did Protocol 14 provide this?  Further reform is being implemented and discussed – suggestions? What do the changes suggest about the role the ECtHR?