Has the echr Failed Us?

Judge Pavli raises an urgent and far-reaching question: can the ECtHR still live up to the vision of its founders and act as a guardian of democracy?It is a timely prompt that merits reflection not only on the Court's jurisprudence but on the broader system of which it is a part.The European Convention on Human Rights (echr or the Convention) system, and the Council of Europe as a whole, are undoubtedly under significant strain.The cumulative pressure is both legal and political, internal and external.It includes the persistent non-compliance with judgments by certain states, a growing discourse of subsidiarity that privileges national sovereignty over supranational standard-setting, and outright challenges to the Court's authority in politically charged areas.Democratic backsliding within member states has been accompanied by open resistance to the values and authority that the echr system represents.This pressure comes not only from less consolidated democracies where the rule of law and institutional checks and balances remain fragile, but also from long-standing liberal democracies, where support for the system has weakened or become conditional.Earlier this year, on 22 May 2025, the leaders of nine European Union member states -Denmark, Italy, Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland -issued an unprecedented open letter outside the institutional channels of the Council of Europe.1 Addressed to no