European Convention on Human Rights

In any description of men's rights and their equitable treatment within society, the issue of human rights violations occurs. The most important conventions that cover this are the United Nations (UN) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and, for those living in Europe, the European Convention on Human Rights (formally the Council of Europe's Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms). This latter has much more significance, as the individual may apply (under Article 25) directly to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

A brief study of the European Convention on Human Rights informs everyone immediately that men's human rights are being violated on a large scale, and under a number of areas, and in particular we may identify the most important Articles in the European Convention :

Current applications to Strasbourg

The UKMM has monitored applications to Strasbourg. By October 1998 there were 18 known cases (and probably other cases not made known to us) concerning matrimonial and family law as well as social and financial policy.

All of these cases, for which decisions are known, have been turned down (the technical phrase being 'declared inadmissible') by the Commission/Court. Almost unbelievably, they have also refused to give reasons for their decisions, despite their own 'Rules of Procedure' requiring them to do that. Rule of Procedure 52(2) requires that all decisions of the Commission 'shall be accompanied or followed by reasons'. (Please note that the new Court replaces the Commission/Court from 1st November 1998, with new 'Rules of Court' to define procedures etc.).

In October 1998 there were 8 outstanding cases known to us

Two cases relate to the secrecy of court cases and judgements in matrimonial and family law - which violate Article 6(1) of the convention - which guarantees that 'judgement shall be pronounced publicly'.

Four cases cover 6 social security provisions, all involving discrimination against men or fathers :

  1. Christopher Crossland of Wiltshire, supported by Liberty, has applied concerning his lack of bereavement allowance, available to widows but not widowers;
  2. Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) have launched a similar action, on behalf of Kevin Willis of Bristol, concerning widow's payment, widowed mother's allowance, and widow's pension not available to men; contact John Jackson at CPAG on 0171 253 3406 (work) 0171 609 0227 (home) for more information;
  3. Campaign for Justice in Divorce (CJD) have applied on behalf of a father in Portsmouth concerning the effective payment by ex-husbands of benefits to ex-wives under Child Support Act 1991 rules; the rules effectively require a man to support his ex-wife even after she has abandoned him;
  4. a UKMM member has applied under Article 14 combined with Article 1 of Protocol 1 concerning his lack of a share of the Child Benefit payable for his children; mothers usually obtain all of the Child Benefit even when the father cares for his children for a proportion of the year.

Another application is concerned with the imprisonment of a father. He was involved in legal action over custody/contact of his children. He had been ordered to have only certain types of contact.  Because he committed the offence of waving to his children he was sent to prison by one of our country's very fine judges. No kidding - we're serious.

And another application, from a member of the Parity organisation - which is concerned with unequal state pension ages and all the consequent discrimination that implies, about the availability of discount bus passes available to women aged over 60 but not men until they are aged 65.

Further applications in progress

In addition to these eight applications to Strasbourg, two further cases concerning discrimination against men in two separate social security provisions are being progressed :

  1. John Taylor, a Parity member living in North Yorkshire, is taking his case to the European Court of Justice : men on a pension aged 60-64 receive an unequal allocation of winter fuel payments compared with women of the same age.

  2. another Parity member has commenced procedings with the Social Security Commissioner, with a view to taking his case forward to a European court : men aged 60-64 have their unemployment benefit (job seekers allowance) reduced for any income, including a private pension, which is above �35 pw, the reduction being on a � per � basis; the reduction does not apply to women in the same situation.

Can the judges in Strasbourg and the European Court of Justice ignore or reject all of these applications ?

Please watch this space for reports on the outcomes.

Wednesday 16 November 1998 : UK Government announces in the House on Commons that widowers will receive the same benefits as widows. The media reports indicated that the UK were likely to lose the Steve Willis case (see above) at ECHR and that this was a major factor forcing the Government to act.

UKMM will provide advice and encouragement, and possible financial assistance, to any man wishing to take his case, or a group of cases, to the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg. It's not difficult, you don't need a solicitor, and it's not expensive. You may wish to look initially at information we also provide on this site :

Take your own case to the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg

Consider use of the UK's Human Rights Act 1998

European Court of Human Rights website

Please use the enquiry form to contact us about this