CYIL Vol. 7, 2016

IRENA MARKOVÁ CYIL 7 ȍ2016Ȏ Convention is considerably wider in comparison to the “classic” definition. Then, after distinguishing four major roles which the NGOs play in the Convention system, she concentrates on what she has named “Article 34 NGO”. According to the author, who qualifies this definition as “unprecedented” (p. 298), Article 34 NGO is “a profit or non-profit making legal entity, with or without formal existence, which does not directly participate in the exercise of governmental powers and has a sufficient degree of independence from governmental control. Such an organization must have victim status in accordance with the Court’s case-law.” The most significant part of the book lays out the rights of Article 34 NGOs under the Convention. In this context, attention is drawn to a very new concept, that of a de facto representative, elaborated by the Court in the case of Centre for Legal resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania . 2 The two parts of the second chapter are devoted to the rights bestowed on Article 34 NGOs by the Convention in its narrow sense, on one hand, and by the Protocols to the Convention, on the other hand. The final chapter deals with just satisfaction awarded under Article 41 of the Convention. The last part of this chapter is based in the author’s research concerning the highest amounts of the just satisfaction awarded to Article 34 NGOs, providing a table of the top ten cases in this respect. The book reveals the author’s profound knowledge of the Court’s case-law. Her analysis of the Court’s practice in respect of NGOs is very thorough and comprehensive. One of the merits of this book is that it sets out to combine abstract notions with empirical application. Indeed, the book’s greatest strength is that it provides a systematic overview of the relevant case-law generated by the Court, until mid-2015, in relation to each of the Convention rights which can be relied upon by the NGOs. Namely the second chapter may thus attract a broader public interest since it also contains general observations on the rights guaranteed by the Convention which go beyond the sole context of NGOs. Interestingly, the author’s research on the existence of legislation pertaining to the corporate criminal liability in the 47 Member States of the Council of Europe is also included. In my view, however, Tymofeyeva is too generous in stating, in the third chapter of her book, that “the most elaborated system of victim’s compensation is seen in the practice of the Court” (p. 260). I would personally tend to think that comprehensive reparations developed by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights under Article 63.1 of the American Convention on Human Rights provide a mechanism which is more refined and which can better lead to remedying the consequences of the breaches in question. 2 See Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 114, ECHR 2014, and also the critique of the Court’s approach to standing in this case made by Judge Pinto de Albuquerque in his concurring opinion.

490