Why the Court is in Strasbourg – and other things

1 January 2015 by

strasbourgcathedral2Like lots of things to do with the ECHR, the idea seems to have been British. As Simpson put it in his magnificent history of the Convention, Human Rights and the End of Empire (OUP, 2001), Our Man (Jebb), in early 1949, appears to have suggested the site of the Council of Europe should be Strasbourg 

not for its architectural or gastronomic qualities, much less for its geese, but because of its symbolic significance for Franco-German reconciliation

Quite obvious, when you think about it. I was spurred into this by my winter festival reading, Neil MacGregor’s Germany.

Strasbourg commands a chapter, Floating City. Floating, because it swapped between Germany and France regularly, with increasing rapidity in the run up to the ECHR in 1950.  Formerly known as Strassburg, it had been emphatically part of the Holy Roman Empire, an Imperial city, a bishopric and German-speaking, until Louis XIV nicked it in 1681 – in war. The French were wise enough to administer it with a light touch – German remaining the predominant language – so it remained nominally French until 1871. Indeed, Goethe (and Metternich) studied there, and Goethe lauded the Gothic mediaeval cathedral (see pics) as reflecting supremely German architecture (Von Deutscher Baukunst) –  which of course it wasn’t, given that Gothic architecture derives from France.

Tables were turned in 1871, when the Prussians repossessed it – in war. It became French in 1919, as a result of war. Back to Germany in 1940, in war – and it is said that in the next 4 years of occupation the Germans achieved what the French had failed to achieve in the previous 20 years – namely the turning of Alsace into Frenchmen. Still German-speaking Frenchmen, at that stage, though since the end of WWII it has become francophone. But any visitor to this day will experience a slightly dizzying feeling of being French in a historically Germanic place – walk around Riquewihr and you will know what I mean.

So Our Man had alighted upon a perfect symbol for European reconciliation. The whole political idea of Europeanness was then (in the late 40’s) linked to human rights, and at the time it was far from clear whether the agreement underpinning the Council of Europe would be the limit of it, or whether the more fundamental federalist movement would prevail – though it is plain from Simpson’s research that the UK was then strongly against anything more deep-seated, so in retrospect federalism involving the UK was extremely unlikely.

But there is an odd irony arising out of Germany and its predecessor. We tend to think these days about historic Germany, as a nation of warlike Prussians swiftly followed by Nazis – and some of the current Euro rhetoric harks back to this. But Germany, as a nation, was of course still young in the late 194os (think formation in 1871), but the Holy Roman Empire which preceded it had been a strange paradigm for what the EU has become. A patchwork of well over a hundred princes, free cities and bishoprics had sovereignty over their own areas. But there was an overriding imperial system, with a parliament of sorts (sitting in the Reichstag) seeking to agree on imperial measures – if not agreed, not enacted. As Joachim Whaley observes

The system of devolved power…that, I think is a deep legacy. It gives one a sense of the German willingness to compromise, their endless patience with negotiations within the European system today.

 And MacGregor puts it very well – particularly as we approach an important year or two in our relationship with Europe
one might describe the Holy Roman Empire as the triumph of creative fragmentation. The fragments know they belong together, are parts of a unit. The only questions are how tightly they should fit together and who is in charge of the process.
Indeed. But wait:
These are not questions the British or French have been good at asking or answering. Thanks to the Holy Roman Empire, the Germans have had a thousand years of practice.
So perhaps we would do well with a little bit of patience before we throw anything European out of the pram.
Sign up to free human rights updates by email, Facebook, Twitter or RSS

Related posts:

2 comments


  1. Having read Mac Gregor over the holidays also, I was struck by that very point. Strasbourg should remind us of exactly why we have embarked on the European project and why it reminds important.

  2. Andrew says:

    To this day the history textbooks used in French schools do not mention that in 1919 there were massive riots in Strasbourg against it being returned to French rule!

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the UKHRB


This blog is run by 1 Crown Office Row barristers' chambers. Subscribe for free updates here. The blog's editorial team is:
Commissioning Editor: Jonathan Metzer
Editorial Team: Rosalind English
Angus McCullough QC David Hart QC
Martin Downs
Jim Duffy

Free email updates


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog for free and receive weekly notifications of new posts by email.

Subscribe

Categories


Tags


Aarhus Abortion Abu Qatada Abuse Access to justice adoption AI air pollution air travel ALBA Allergy Al Qaeda Amnesty International animal rights Animals anonymity Article 1 Protocol 1 Article 2 article 3 Article 4 article 5 Article 6 Article 8 Article 9 article 10 Article 11 article 13 Article 14 article 263 TFEU Artificial Intelligence Asbestos Assange assisted suicide asylum asylum seekers Australia autism badgers benefits Bill of Rights biotechnology blogging Bloody Sunday brexit Bribery British Waterways Board Catholic Church Catholicism Chagos Islanders Charter of Fundamental Rights child protection Children children's rights China christianity citizenship civil liberties campaigners civil partnerships climate change clinical negligence closed material procedure Coercion Commission on a Bill of Rights common law communications competition confidentiality consent conservation constitution contact order contact tracing contempt of court Control orders Copyright coronavirus coronavirus act 2020 costs costs budgets Court of Protection covid crime criminal law Cybersecurity Damages data protection death penalty defamation DEFRA deportation deprivation of liberty derogations Detention Dignitas diplomacy disability disclosure Discrimination disease divorce DNA domestic violence duty of care ECHR ECtHR Education election Employment Environment Equality Act Equality Act 2010 Ethiopia EU EU Charter of Fundamental Rights EU costs EU law European Convention on Human Rights European Court of Human Rights European Court of Justice evidence extradition extraordinary rendition Facebook Facial Recognition Family Fatal Accidents Fertility FGM Finance foreign criminals foreign office foreign policy France freedom of assembly Freedom of Expression freedom of information freedom of speech Gay marriage gay rights Gaza Gender genetics Germany Google Grenfell Gun Control Health HIV home office Housing HRLA human rights Human Rights Act human rights news Human Rights Watch Huntington's Disease immigration India Indonesia injunction Inquests insurance international law internet inuit Iran Iraq Ireland islam Israel Italy IVF ivory ban Japan joint enterprise judaism judicial review Judicial Review reform Julian Assange jury trial JUSTICE Justice and Security Bill Law Pod UK legal aid legal aid cuts Leveson Inquiry lgbtq liability Libel Liberty Libya lisbon treaty Lithuania local authorities marriage Media and Censorship mental capacity Mental Capacity Act Mental Health military Ministry of Justice modern slavery morocco murder music Muslim nationality national security naturism neuroscience NHS Northern Ireland nuclear challenges nuisance Obituary parental rights parliamentary expenses scandal patents Pensions Personal Injury physician assisted death Piracy Plagiarism planning planning system Poland Police Politics Pope press prison Prisoners prisoner votes Prisons privacy Professional Discipline Property proportionality prosecutions Protection of Freedoms Bill Protest Public/Private public access public authorities public inquiries quarantine Radicalisation rehabilitation Reith Lectures Religion RightsInfo right to die right to family life Right to Privacy right to swim riots Roma Romania round-up Round Up Royals Russia saudi arabia Scotland secrecy secret justice Secret trials sexual offence shamima begum Sikhism Smoking social media social workers South Africa Spain special advocates Sports Standing starvation statelessness stem cells stop and search Strasbourg super injunctions Supreme Court Supreme Court of Canada surrogacy surveillance sweatshops Syria Tax technology Terrorism tort Torture travel treason treaty accession trial by jury TTIP Turkey Twitter UK Ukraine universal credit universal jurisdiction unlawful detention USA US Supreme Court vicarious liability Wales War Crimes Wars Welfare Western Sahara Whistleblowing Wikileaks wildlife wind farms WomenInLaw Worboys wrongful birth YearInReview Zimbabwe

Disclaimer


This blog is maintained for information purposes only. It is not intended to be a source of legal advice and must not be relied upon as such. Blog posts reflect the views and opinions of their individual authors, not of chambers as a whole.

Our privacy policy can be found on our ‘subscribe’ page or by clicking here.

%d bloggers like this: