NGOs under European Convention on Human Rights / Tymofeyeva

is not obliged to be a member of a bar to be able to practice law and represent the interests of his or her clients before the Ukrainian courts. 441 The NGO member acting as a representative must also master the official language of the Court. 442 Similar to the applicant, a representative must provide the Court only with truthful information and follow all the instructions received from the Court in the course of the proceeding. All written submissions must be filed within the deadline. 443 Rule 45 § 3 of the Rules of Court requires the representatives to confirm their status by a written authority to act, duly signed by the applicant. It is essential for representatives to demonstrate that they have received specific and explicit instructions from the alleged victim within the meaning of Article 34 on whose behalf they purport to act before the Court. 444 However, under exceptional circumstances, in a limited number of cases, the Convention institutions accepted applications lodged by individuals on behalf of the victim(s), even though no valid form of authority was presented. This was, for example, the case of Y. F. v. Turkey , 445 where the Court noted that it was never disputed that the applicant could bring a complaint on behalf of his wife. In this connection, it reiterated that close relatives of the victim are free to make a complaint concerning allegations of violations of the Convention in the special circumstances having regard to the vulnerable position of the direct victim. 446 Similarly, in the case of İlhan v. Turkey , 447 the applicant, on behalf of his brother, who had been mistreated, brought the complaints. Having regard to the special circumstances of this case, the Court held that the applicant may be considered to have validly introduced the application and accordingly dismissed the Turkish government’s preliminary objection in this respect. 448 A solicitor brought a complaint on behalf of children he had represented in domestic proceedings, in which he had been appointed by the guardian ad litem in the case of S. P., D. P. and A. T. v. the United Kingdom . 449 The UK government contested the validity of this exercise. They submitted that the court appointed the guardian for the purposes of those proceedings only and that her role ended when the proceedings ended. Neither the solicitor nor the guardian could, in their view, claim any continuing right to represent the children after the end of these proceedings. If, for whatever reason, the children were to be the subject of new proceedings, the court would not necessarily appoint the same solicitor or guardian to represent them. The 441 KUKHARCHYK, V. and KULYA, M. The Legal Profession In Ukraine . April 2008. URL: accessed 29 May 2015. 442 Rule 36 of the Rules of Court. 443 Ibid. , Rule 32. 444 Post v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 21727/08, 20 January 2009 and Aliev v. Georgia, no. 522/04, §§ 44 49, 13 January 2009. 445 Y. F. v. Turkey , no. 24209/94, ECHR 2003-IX. 446 Ibid. , § 31. 447 İlhan v. Turkey [GC], no. 22277/93, ECHR 2000-VII. 448 Ibid. , § 55. 449 S.P., D. P. and A.T. v. the United Kingdom , no. 23715/94, Commission decision of 20 May 1996.

84