Freer and fairer? How the ECHR has helped reform elections to the European Parliament

This Excel file comprises two parts as outlined in the ‘Explanatory Notes’ sheet of the excel file. Part 1 comprises 2 spreadsheets presenting the data analysis of the rate at which judgments of the European Court of Human Rights have been executed. This dataset comprises data relating to all cases that have been closed and are still pending implementation as collected from the database of The Department for the Execution of Judgments of the ECHR, available at https://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng. Aggregate numbers for all violations of ECHR rights were collected. These therefore comprise data relating to all judgments where the Court has found a violation, as recorded in the HUDOC EXEC database, since the Court’s inception. The data and analysis are impressionistic in scope and should be treated with caution because the HUDOC EXEC database is not intended for this purpose. HUDOC EXEC is updated regularly so these data reflect the status quo on 11 February 2026 and may have changed since then. The purpose of the analysis was to compare trends in the rate of execution across ECHR rights, to see whether Article 3 of Protocol 1 (A3P1), the right to free elections, was relatively slower. Not all electoral violations are captured in A3P1, so this analysis is broadbrush in scope. Names of cases and data relating to particular ECHR States Parties are not included. These data support the statement made at footnote 7 of H. Hardman (2026) 'Freer and fairer? How the ECHR has helped reform elections to the European Parliament' Human Rights Law Review 26(3). Part 2 comprises 4 spreadsheets that clarify how the data in Tables 1-3 (Hardman, 2026) were quantified. The purpose of these spreadsheets is to provide a visual aid to supplement the explanation of the method used to calculate the rate at which electoral complaints have been remedied, which are presented in Section 6, Conclusions (Hardman, 2026).