McKerr v. United Kingdom

Abstract

Human rights — Right to life — Article 2 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Substantive obligation — Procedural obligation — Alleged unlawful killing by State agents — Use of force falling within ambit of Article 2 of Convention — Whether use of force pursuing one of purposes set out in Article 2(2) — Whether absolutely necessary for that purpose — Key factual issues to be determined — Role of European Court of Human Rights — Whether effective investigation into circumstances of death — Whether respondent State failing to comply with procedural obligation imposed by Article 2 — Whether respondent State violating Article 2 of Convention

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 2 — Use of lethal force by State agents in Northern Ireland — Whether use of force absolutely necessary for one of Article 2(2) purposes — Key factual issues to be determined — Role of European Court of Human Rights — Role of domestic civil courts — Ability of domestic courts to establish facts and determine whether death lawful — Procedures for investigating — Whether disclosing shortcomings — Whether domestic remedies exhausted — Civil proceedings — Examination of facts, determination of liability and awarding of compensation — Whether civil proceedings providing redress

State responsibility — State agents using lethal force in Northern Ireland — Whether State responsible for death of Mr McKerr — Use of force falling within ambit of Article 2 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether use of force pursuing one of purposes set out in Article 2(2) — Whether absolutely necessary for that purpose — Key factual issues to be determined — Role of European Court of Human Rights — Obligations of State under Article 2 — Awarding of damages alone insufficient — Whether respondent State failing to comply with procedural obligation under Article 2 of Convention

Terrorism — Anti-terrorism operations — Alleged unlawful killing by State agents — Whether shoot-to-kill policy operating in Northern Ireland in 1980s — Whether killing or arresting of terrorist suspects — Whether Royal Ulster Constabulary police officers acting on honest belief of being at risk from men at time of killing — Key factual issues to be determined — Role of European Court of Human Rights — Role of domestic civil courts — Whether effective investigation into circumstances of death — Whether respondent State failing to comply with procedural obligation imposed by Article 2 of Convention — Whether respondent State violating Article 2 of Convention

Human rights — Discrimination — Use of lethal force by State agents — Majority of those killed belonging to Catholic or nationalist community — General policy having disproportionately prejudicial effects on particular group — Whether having to be aimed at that group — Whether discriminatory practice being disclosed by statistics alone — Whether evidence before Court to suggest killings involving unlawful or excessive use of force by security forces — Whether respondent State violating Article 14 of Convention

Human rights — Remedies — Whether applicant having effective remedy in respect of complaint — Cases involving use of lethal force or suspicious death — Requirement of payment of compensation if appropriate — Whether appropriate — Whether thorough and effective investigation capable of leading to identification and punishment of those responsible — Whether effective access for complainant to investigation procedure — Whether domestic remedies exhausted — Whether civil proceedings providing redress — Whether respondent State violating Article 13 of Convention

Damages — Compensation — Non-pecuniary damages — Whether award appropriate — Whether finding as to lawfulness or proportionality of use of force — Whether national authorities fulfilling obligation to carry out prompt and effective investigation into circumstances of death — Whether compensation of finding of violation of Convention sufficient — Whether applicant entitled to damages in respect of unlawful deprivation of life of his father