Below is a selection of legal briefs, or amicus curiae, that INTERIGHTS has submitted to a range of international and national tribunals. Please click on the relevant case to download the document. For further information on  submissions, please see the relevant section.

Jones v Saudi Arabia (2006) Filed by INTERIGHTS, Redress, Amnesty International and Justice before the UK House of Lords. The case challenges the state immunity of foreign officials in UK courts for the torture of four falsely accused UK nationals in Saudi Arabia. See Latest News for further information.

Ramzy v the Netherlands (2005) Filed by INTERIGHTS and seven international NGOs before the European Court of Human Rights. The case concerns the proposed deportation of the applicant to Algeria where, he claims, he will be subject to torture or ill treatment as a terrorist suspect. This case is likely to prove critical to the protection against torture and ill-treatment under the European system and potentially beyond. The brief also benefitted from the input of the World Organisation against Torture (OMCT), the Medical Foundation for the Protection of the Victims of Torture and the Harvard Law School Legal Clinic. See Latest News for further information and Annexes.

A & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2005) Filed by INTERIGHTS and 13 other international and UK-focused NGOs before the UK House of Lords. The case concerns the admissibility of evidence obtained through torture or inhuman treatment in proceedings in UK courts. INTERIGHTS took the leading role in developing the legal arguments in the case. See Latest News for further information.

Blecic v Croatia (2005) Filed by INTERIGHTS before the European Court of Human Rights. The case involves the termination by the Croatian courts of the ‘special occupancy rights’ of the applicant during the conflict in the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s. The brief requested the Court to review the appropriate margin of appreciation afforded to states in such cases and to reconsider the standard of review of state restrictions on rights protected by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. See Latest News for further information.

Nachova v Bulgaria (2004) Filed by INTERIGHTS before the European Court of Human Rights. INTERIGHTS' brief urges the Court to adopt a flexible approach to issues of evidence in discrimination cases, particularly with respect to standard of proof adopted and the allocation of the burden of proof. See Latest News for further information.

Caesar v Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (2004) Filed by INTERIGHTS before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. This brief concerns the issue of whether judicial corporal punishment constitutes 'cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment' within the meaning of Article 5 of the American Convention on Human Rights. See Latest News for further information.

D.H. and Others v the Czech Republic (2004) Filed by INTERIGHTS and Human Rights Watch before the European Court of Human Rights. The case concerns discrimination on the basis of race in school placement of Roma children. The brief outlines ways in which courts in other jurisdictions allow for indirect discrimination to be proved, and the critical role of statistics in this regard. The case is yet to be decided. See Equality Programme Activities for more information.

Tachiona and Others v Mugabe and Others (2004) Filed by INTERIGHTS before the US Court of Appeals. The brief outlines the jus cogens status of fundamental rights guaranteeing personal liberty and security and why they should defeat any claim of head of state immunity.

Lawrence v Texas (2003) Filed by INTERIGHTS, Amnesty International, Mary Robinson et al before the US Supreme Court. The brief adopts a comparative human rights approach to the protection of the right to privacy of same sex couples.

MC v Bulgaria (2003) Filed by INTERIGHTS before the European Court of Human Rights. This brief reviews the laws of eight states concerning the necessity of proof of use of physical force or the victim's resistance in establishing rape.

Rafael Marques v Angola (2002) Filed by INTERIGHTS and OSI before the UN Human Rights Committee. The brief concerns freedom of expression and the right to fair trial.

Al Odah v USA (2002) Filed by INTERIGHTS and California Western School of Law before the US Court of Appeals. The brief reviews the case of 12 Kuwaiti nationals detained at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, and addresses the applicable framework under international humanitarian and human rights law, specifically the right to have one�s status determined; the right of access to a lawyer; and the right to have detention judicially reviewed.

Nikula v Finland (2001) Filed by INTERIGHTS before the European Court of Human Rights reviewing the laws of ten democratic states concerning the necessity of restrictions in the right to freedom of expression, as exercised by a lawyer appearing on behalf of a client before a court. The brief is appended with statements of the legal experts from each of the jurisdictions surveyed

Toguc and Others v Turkey (2000) Filed by INTERIGHTS before the European Court of Human Rights reviewing the laws of nine democratic states concerning the necessity of restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression and association. The brief is appended with statements of legal experts from each of the jurisdictions surveyed.

Incal v Turkey (1997) Filed before the European Court of Human Rights by INTERIGHTS and ARTICLE 19 reviewing laws governing speech that is critical of government and considered to threaten public order in nine democracies across the world. The brief is appended with declarations from experts in each of the nine jurisdictions surveyed.

Goodwin v UK (1995) Filed before the European Court of Human Rights by INTERIGHTS and ARTICLE 19. This brief surveys the laws of seven European countries on the protection of journalists' sources.

Wingrove v UK (1995) Filed before the European Court of Human Rights by INTERIGHTS and ARTICLE 19. The brief includes a survey of European and US law relating to censorship of films deemed blasphemous. In addition, this brief reviews laws governing film and video classification, and powers of prior censorship by those classification mechanisms. This brief is appended with the declaration of domestic law contained in the Otto Preminger v Austria brief and is updated with further expert statements.

Nemi v Lagos (1995) Filed before Nigerian Courts by INTERIGHTS, the INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW GROUP and AFRONET. Summarising the state of comparative law on the consequences of delay in the execution of the death penalty.

Prager and Oberschlick v Austria (1994) Filed before the European Court of Human Rights by INTERIGHTS and ARTICLE 19. This brief surveys the law of seven European countries, with brief reference to the United States, on the law governing defamation of judges, as well as the assessment of 'facts', 'value judgements' and 'exaggeration' in defamation law. The brief is appended with declarations from experts in each of the European countries reviewed.

Informationsverein Lentia and Others v Austria (1993) Filed before the European Court of Human Rights by INTERIGHTS and ARTICLE 19. These comments assess the compatibility of Austria's public broadcasting monopoly with Article 10's guarantee of free expression by examining laws and regulations governing broadcasting in a number of European countries.

Otto Preminger Institut v Austria (1993) Filed before the European Court of Human Rights by INTERIGHTS and ARTICLE 19. This brief contains a survey of laws governing blasphemy in ten European countries and the USA. These comments are annexed by declarations by experts on national law from nine of those countries.