Understanding ECHR Rule 39 Interim Measures

What Are ECHR Rule 39 Interim Measures?

Their binding nature was cemented in the landmark case of Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey. The Court’s Grand Chamber was unequivocal: all member states must comply with a Rule 39 order. Any state that fails to do so violates Article 34 of the Convention, because it blocks the Court from being able to protect you.

When Can You Request an Interim Measure?

You can only succeed with a request for an interim measure if you meet an incredibly high bar. The Court grants these measures sparingly. They are reserved for when they are strictly necessary.

The “Imminent Risk of Irreparable Harm” Test

The core of your request must prove a direct, immediate link between what the state plans to do (like deporting you) and a serious, irreversible violation of your rights. The danger cannot be speculative. It must be real and about to happen. You have to show that without the Court’s emergency intervention, you will suffer harm that no future judgment can ever fix.

Common Scenarios for Rule 39

While the rule is flexible, it’s most frequently used in specific, life-or-death contexts:

• Expulsion and Extradition: This is where Rule 39 is most commonly seen. An individual facing removal to a country where there’s a real risk of the death penalty, torture, or inhuman treatment can request a measure to stop it.
• Right to Life in Detention: In some cases, a detainee’s life is at immediate risk from a severe medical condition and the state is failing to provide adequate care. Here, the Court may indicate measures to ensure the person gets the treatment they need.
• Other Exceptional Cases: Although rare, the Court can apply measures in other scenarios where the strict criteria of imminent and irreparable harm are met. This could involve protecting the integrity of evidence or, in extreme circumstances, safeguarding family life.

Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies

Normally, you must use all available and effective legal remedies in your country first. But for Rule 39 requests, this rule is applied with flexibility. If the domestic legal process is too slow to stop the harm—or if there are no options that automatically pause your deportation—you can go directly to the ECHR. This is a critical exception; you don’t need to wait for a final “no” from national courts if that “no” comes too late.

How Do You Apply for a Rule 39 Interim Measure?

Speed is everything. So is precision. Your request must go straight to the Court’s Registry with all the information the Duty Judge needs to make a decision in a matter of hours.

Using the ECHR Rule 39 Site

The best and fastest way to lodge a request is through the dedicated ECHR Rule 39 Site (r39.echr.coe.int). This secure online portal is built for just one purpose: handling urgent interim measure requests. It guarantees the quickest processing. When using the portal, you must enter the applicant’s data and upload at least one PDF attachment with all your case details and supporting evidence. For guidance on the main application that comes next, see our guide on how to apply to the ECHR.

Alternative Submission Methods

If you can’t access the online portal, you can send your request by fax to the Court’s dedicated number: +33 (0)3 88 41 27 30. Sending by post is technically possible, but as a last resort it’s a bad idea for urgent situations. Be warned: the Court does not accept Rule 39 requests submitted by email.

What information must a Rule 39 application contain?

A successful application is complete and meticulously documented. You must have:

• A completed request form: This is your summary of the facts, the alleged Convention violations, and the specific, irreparable harm you face if the measure is not granted. Be clear and concise.
• Proof of imminent risk: You need hard evidence that the harm is not just possible, but about to happen. This could be a court order for your removal, credible threats against you in the destination country, or reports from human rights organisations about the situation there.
• Supporting documents: Don’t forget copies of all relevant domestic court decisions (especially the final one), the deportation or extradition order, medical reports, and any other evidence. Everything must be legible and ideally combined into a single PDF.
• Information on exhausted remedies: You must include a statement explaining which legal paths you’ve already taken at the national level and why they weren’t effective or fast enough to protect you.

What Happens After You Submit a Request?

Once submitted, your request gets immediate priority. The entire process is built for speed because the situations are so dire.

Initial Assessment by the Court

The Court’s Registry receives and examines the request with extreme urgency. A Duty Judge, a Chamber, or the President of a Section assesses whether you have met the high threshold of “imminent risk of irreparable harm.” A decision can come within hours, especially if a removal is scheduled for that same day.

Possible Outcomes

You can expect one of three outcomes from your Rule 39 request:

1. Measure Granted: The Court “indicates” the interim measure to the government. It might, for example, order the state “not to expel the applicant to [Country X] until further notice.” This order immediately halts the planned action. In 2023, the Court granted such interim measures in 791 cases.
2. Request Refused: The Court decides that the conditions for an interim measure are not met. This isn’t a judgment on your main application; it only means the situation wasn’t deemed urgent or severe enough for an emergency stop order. You still have your main case.
3. Request for More Information: Sometimes, the Court needs more details before deciding. It might ask you or the government to provide additional information or documents.

Duration and Review of an Interim Measure

An interim measure stays in place until the Court says otherwise. It might last for a set period or for the entire case. Under procedural rules updated on 28 March 2024, the Court clarified that it can reconsider or lift a measure if the facts of the case change significantly.

Is a Rule 39 Decision Legally Binding?

Yes. Absolutely. A decision by the ECHR to indicate an interim measure under Rule 39 is legally binding on the member state concerned.

This principle was cemented by the Grand Chamber of the ECHR in the 2005 case of Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey. The Court held that a state’s failure to comply with a Rule 39 measure is a violation of its obligations under Article 34 of the Convention, which guarantees your right to bring a case to the Court in the first place.

The Court’s logic is simple: if a state could just ignore an interim measure, its entire process would be useless. You could suffer the very harm your case is trying to prevent, making any future judgment from the Court a hollow victory. This obligation ensures the practical and effective protection of the fundamental rights in the European Convention on Human Rights.

If a state defies a Rule 39 order, it faces real consequences. The Court will find it in violation of its treaty obligations. This results in a separate judgment against the state for obstructing the right of individual petition, on top of any judgment on the original human rights violations.

This article is published by an independent law firm for informational purposes only and does not represent or claim affiliation with any government body, international organization, or official authority.