Compendium of Standards, Good Practices and Recommendations
Moreover, as already outlined in “Chapter 5: Civil and Political Rights”, the exercise of
the right may be restricted, but may not be entirely denied to members of the armed
forces.250 Thus, the Court’s jurisprudence indicates that the armed forces are not allowed to
absolutely prohibit their personnel from joining a group that was formed to protect their
occupational and non-pecuniary interests. An absolute ban applicable in France was found
to constitute an undue restriction on the freedom of association in a challenge brought
by two associations (see Box 7.3).251 Following these rulings, and on the recommendation of
the Conseil D’État, amendments to the Defence Code were introduced in 2015 permitting
members of the Armed Forces to create and join professional military associations.252
Box 7.3: Freedom of association in the European Court of Human Rights253
Jean-Hugues Matelly, an officer in the gendarmerie (part of the French Armed Forces),
who was employed as an accountant, was a founding member and vice-president of
Forum Gendarmes et Citoyens, an association formed to provide a legal framework for an
Internet forum enabling gendarmes and citizens to express themselves and exchange
views. Other serving gendarmes were involved in the association as members, and
some sat on its administrative board. The association’s objectives included “defending
the pecuniary and non-pecuniary situation of gendarmes”. Soon after the association’s
launch, Matelly and the other serving gendarmes who were members of the association
were ordered to resign from it immediately, on the basis that the association resembled
a trade union occupational group, prohibited under the Defence Code. The applicant
resigned from the association and the offending objective was removed from the
association’s constitution. The Conseil d’État, nonetheless, dismissed an application for
judicial review of the order to resign.
The European Court of Human Rights held that, although significant restrictions on the
freedom of a professional association were permitted, these could not entirely deprive
the association’s members of their rights under Article 11 of the Convention. The Court
noted that, although the French State had put in place special bodies and procedures
to take into account the concerns of military personnel,254 these measures could not
substitute freedom of association rights for military personnel, which includes the right
to form and join trade unions.
250
See: European Court for Human Rights, Matelly v. France, op. cit., note 2, paras. 57-58; and ADEFDROMIL v.
France, op. cit., note 143.
251
Ibid.
252
“Contact with New French Professional Military Associations”, EUROMIL, http://euromil.org/contact-with-new-french-professional-military-associations/.
253
European Court for Human Rights, Matelly v. France, op. cit., note 2; and ADEFDROMIL v. France, op. cit., note
143.
254
Ibid., paras. 53-54.
115
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents