ECHR urge McCanns to reach friendly settlement with Gonçalo Amaral.

[G-Unit]

and what if Portugal refuses to make an offer, would that be seen as reasonable?

It seems to me that the Portuguese courts tried their very best to take on board and answer the claims relating to human rights in this case. Therefore any offer they might make is unlikely, imo, to include admitting that they got it wrong.

[Eleanor]

It seems to me that the Portuguese courts tried their very best to take on board and answer the claims relating to human rights in this case. Therefore any offer they might make is unlikely, imo, to include admitting that they got it wrong.

So what would be the point in offering Money?

[Mr Gray]

It seems to me that the Portuguese courts tried their very best to take on board and answer the claims relating to human rights in this case. Therefore any offer they might make is unlikely, imo, to include admitting that they got it wrong.

We know that the SC has got things wrong in the past so it's possible they have this time. It will be interesting to see what happens... From looking a t other cases involving articles 8 and 10 I think they have a very strong case

[jassi]

So what would be the point in offering Money?

Short of offering someone's head on a spike, what do you suggest ?

[Vertigo Swirl]

It seems to me that the Portuguese courts tried their very best to take on board and answer the claims relating to human rights in this case. Therefore any offer they might make is unlikely, imo, to include admitting that they got it wrong.

I'm sure you could say the same for any state that has been taken to the ECHR.  None is very likely to want to admit that their highest court in the land breached someone's human rights are they?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Short of offering someone's head on a spike, what do you suggest ?

An admission that they got it wrong and did breach their human rights, no need for heads on spikes, very messy that would be.

[Eleanor]

Short of offering someone's head on a spike, what do you suggest ?

I think it is quite simple.  The McCanns want some recognition of their Human Rights.

[Mr Gray]

Unless there is an admission Amaral can say everything again and again and the McCanns have no recourse.... That's why no ruling on the human rights question would not be a reasonable solution

[jassi]

I think it is quite simple.  The McCanns want some recognition of their Human Rights.

perhaps Portugal won't see it that way

[Eleanor]

perhaps Portugal won't see it that way

I would say obviously not.  Apart from The Court of The First Instance, of course.

But it would seem that it would be Portugal who have to decide on what to do.

[jassi]

I would say obviously not.  Apart from The Court of The First Instance, of course.

But it would seem that it would be Portugal who have to decide on what to do.

I don't think that will count. It's down to the big guns now and where politics meets the Law.

[Eleanor]

I don't think that will count. It's down to the big guns now and where politics meets the Law.

I don't know who will have to decide.  But according to G Unit it won't bode well for Portugal if they refuse.

[jassi]

It was mentioned earlier that the Attorney-General equivalent would be involved.

[Eleanor]

It was mentioned earlier that the Attorney-General equivalent would be involved.

Well, that's okay.  I don't much mind who decides.

But a bit of a Dilemma for him if he refuses and then Portugal later loses The Case.  Right to The Top, eh what.
I do not envy him at all.  Whatever his name is.

[barrier]

They won't be ignored. A judgement will be made.

Not so sure, this is worth a read imo, but its a blogger's view.

https://strasbourgobservers.com/2019/11/14/strasbourg-courts-new-non-contentious-phase-a-tax-on-lawlessness/