Introduction

The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) is part of the laws of Malta (Chapter 319) and is applied by the Courts of Justice in Malta.  The Convention imposes on the State a positive obligation to put in place adequate legal frameworks that protect the human rights of persons, to ensure that those frameworks are effectively enforced, and to strike a fair balance between competing interests. 

Human rights law safeguards the person from disproportionate and persistent interference to his legitimate way of life.  As far as entertainment and other places are concerned, this means that if the State grants licences to establishments, tolerates amplified music without control, fails to curtail noise from becoming intense and persistent, fails to enforce licence conditions, and ignores or “looks the other way” when confronted by continuous complaints, then the matter does not remain any longer restricted within the ambit of ordinary law but raises human rights concerns. ate may find itself in breach of its positive obligation to protect the rights of people under Art 8 of the Convention. 

The  European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”) treats severe, prolonged, and avoidable environmental noise, especially night time noise affecting the home, as a potential interference with, or failure to secure, Art 8 of the Convention, which in subarticle (1) states that “everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and correspondence”. The right to peaceful enjoyment is included within the notion of “home”. 

Moreno Gómez v Spain - (Case No. 4143/2002)
Final: 16 February 2005

Facts

In 1970, the applicant, Pilar Moreno Gómez was living in a residential area of Valencia. From 1974 onwards, the municipality authorised nightlife venues (bars/pubs/discotheques) close to her home. The resulting night time noise made rest “impossible” for her and other residents.  In later years local authorities officially designated the area as an “acoustically saturated zone” due to intense nightlife activity.  In 1983, the municipality decided not to authorise further venues in the area, but new licenses were nevertheless granted. Despite existing municipal noise regulations, and despite official decibel limits acknowledged excessive noise levels, the authorities failed to enforce regulations effectively.  Night-time noise from bars and clubs repeatedly exceeded permitted limits. The applicant complained without meaningful remedy. 

Art 8 of the Convention

The applicant requested protection under Art 8.

The question was whether failure by the State to control nightlife noise violated the right to respect of applicant for her home and private life in terms of Art 8 of the Convention.

Considerations

The Court considered the alleged failure of the State to take action against third party noise and therefore non-compliance with the positive obligation of the State to take reasonable and adequate measures in accordance with Art 8. 

The Court found that, given the intensity, night time nature, repeated excesses of authorised levels, and the fact the nuisance persisted over years, the rights of applicant as provided in Art 8 had been violated.

 A central point was that the municipal administration of Valencia had adopted measures (including a by-law on noise and vibrations), which should in principle have acted as safeguards.  Nonetheless the public authority tolerated repeated disregard of its own rules. The Court stressed that laws are useless if not consistently applied and enforced.

The Court made clear the point that severe night-time noise does interfere with the enjoyment of a person’s private life and home. Even where the disturbance is caused by private business, the State must act. Existence of laws is not enough without enforcement.

The ECtHR does not require applicants to prove medical harm but evaluates whether the disturbance is sufficiently serious and avoidable on the basis of objective data to determine severity.   In fact, well established public health evidence can help explain why certain sound levels, especially at night, are incompatible with effective home life. The Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region of the WHO (2018) were developed to provide evidence based recommendations to protect health from noise including leisure noise.

Outcome 

The question is not doing away with nightlife. The Court did not say that nightlife is incompatible with human rights.  However, what the Court said is that the State must regulate and enforce its laws in a manner that protects residents from disproportionate harm.  Therefore, States must strike a fair balance between economic activity and the rights of residents. Where authorities acknowledge serious nuisance and allow systematic non compliance, the “fair balance” requirement is not met.  The Court found against Spain and was ordered to pay applicant damages and costs. 

Importance

The outcome of this judgement stands.

Cuenca Zarzoso v. Spain - (Case No. 23383/12)
Final: 16 April 2018 

This judgement confirmed Moreno Gómez v Spain

Conclusion

In Malta regular (not exceptional) nightlife establishments are licenced to operate close to residential areas.

Public authorities know and acknowledge excessive noise.  Residents complain without effective remedy.

Whatever decisions they take (administrative or otherwise) public bodies should keep these judgements under careful consideration and act accordingly. 

Ombudsman Velislava Delcheva sent a letter to Prime Minister Andrey Gyurov and to the Chair of the Central Election Commission (CEC) Kamelia Neykova regarding the preparation and conduct of the early parliamentary elections on 19 April.

25 February 2026

Ombudsman Velislava Delcheva sent a letter to Prime Minister Andrey Gyurov and to the Chair of the Central Election Commission (CEC) Kamelia Neykova regarding the preparation and conduct of the early parliamentary elections on 19 April.

In it, the Ombudsman raises the issue of ensuring real and equal access to the electoral process for citizens in vulnerable situations, in particular people with disabilities, emphasising that, at present, not all the necessary conditions have been created for the full exercise of electoral rights in accordance with international standards for universal, equal, and secret voting.

 “Every citizen must be given the opportunity to cast their vote on election day and exercise their constitutional right. Moreover, according to the Electoral Code, voting is mandatory and represents the fulfillment of the voter’s civic duty,” Delcheva is adamant.

Among the problems identified are the lack of sign language interpretation for people with hearing impairments when difficulties arise with machine voting devices; the absence of a light signal when printing the control receipt, which creates a risk of their votes not being counted; the lack of official information in Braille and appropriate audio formats at polling stations, as well as the incomplete guarantee of voting secrecy for blind citizens due to the lack of adapted software on voting machines.

In this regard, the Ombudsman proposes that the CEC develop a standard for “accessible polling stations” and that specific actions be taken, including provisions in the Methodological Guidelines for the preparation of polling stations and buildings with the installation of audio players and Braille templates with a list of candidates and parties in designated sections for voters with visual impairments or mobility difficulties.

She also recommends providing online access to sign language interpreters on election day if necessary, setting up an organisation to inform people with hearing and visual impairments about the light and sound signals indicating successful voting, and introducing a free telephone line with information about the voting process.

Last but not least, the Ombudsman draws attention to the need for mechanisms to enable citizens who are subject to mandatory quarantine or isolation to exercise their voting rights.

In her recommendation, Velislava Delcheva also recalls the opinions of the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 21 September 2018, according to which Bulgaria should ensure the accessibility of polling stations and information related to the voting process, including by providing materials in clear formats, such as Easy Read, and by providing the necessary financial and technical resources to improve physical accessibility.

On February 27, 2026, Deputy Public Defender of Georgia Irine Chikhladze and Head of the Gender Department Sophio Rusetski met with members of the Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (GREVIO).

GREVIO is an group of independent experts that monitors the implementation of the Istanbul Convention in member states and assesses both the progress achieved at the legislative and policy levels and the challenges in practice.

The purpose of the visit to Georgia is to comprehensively assess the situation of gender equality and prevention of violence against women and domestic violence in the country.

The meeting discussed the legislative and practical challenges in terms of prevention of violence against women and domestic violence, and the protection and empowerment of victims, as well as the issues of early/child marriage, including forced child marriage. Special attention was paid to the femicide monitoring mechanism.

The participants in the meeting agreed to continue active cooperation.

El Defensor del Pueblo Andaluz en funciones, Jesús Maeztu, ha reivindicado hoy los cuidados en el centro de las políticas públicas y ha subrayado que cuidar —en salud, dependencia, discapacidad, personas mayores y vulnerabilidad— “no es un añadido”, sino una condición básica para que la dignidad y los derechos sean reales y efectivos.

Maeztu ha realizado estas declaraciones durante su Conferencia Magistral en el Acto Académico Solemne con motivo de la festividad de San Juan de Dios, celebrado en el Salón de Grados de la Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud de la Universidad de Granada y presidido por el rector Pedro Mercado.

En su intervención, titulada La salvaguarda de los valores éticos y sociales por el Defensor del Pueblo Andaluz, Maeztu ha recordado que la defensa de los derechos sociales exige una Administración que actúe con diligencia, honestidad y respeto, evitando que los procedimientos se conviertan en barreras que expulsan a las personas del sistema de protección. En este sentido, ha reclamado una “escucha comprensiva” y una “respuesta empática” como rasgos irrenunciables de la buena administración, especialmente cuando está en juego el acceso a recursos de cuidados.

El Defensor ha vinculado el legado de San Juan de Dios con una idea esencial: el cuidado como trato digno, cercano y humano. Maeztu se ha dirigido a estudiantes y profesionales de Enfermería, Fisioterapia y Terapia Ocupacional, para destacar que en los cuidados “importa tanto el qué como el cómo”, y ha apuntado que la excelencia técnica debe ir acompañada de un compromiso ético que ponga a la persona en el centro.

Maeztu ha advertido de que muchas de las quejas que recibe la Institución reflejan un mismo telón de fondo: la falta de recursos humanos y la saturación de los sistemas de atención, con consecuencias directas en el derecho a la salud, la atención a la dependencia y la protección de las personas mayores.

El Defensor andaluz ha señalado que el coste de la inacción o la demora no se mide en trámites, sino en deterioro, sufrimiento e incertidumbre para quienes esperan una valoración, una prestación o una atención que llega tarde. Para “poner rostro” a esa realidad, el Defensor ha compartido testimonios y casos representativos atendidos por la Defensoría, con especial énfasis en la necesidad de reforzar la coordinación sociosanitaria y de sostener políticas públicas que eviten que la fragilidad se convierta en exclusión.

La celebración de San Juan de Dios en la Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud se enmarca en un programa de actividades desarrollado del 2 al 5 de marzo, culminado hoy con el acto institucional.

Buckinghamshire brothers with special educational needs were left without the speech and language therapy they were legally entitled to for more than a year - because Buckinghamshire Council failed to make sure it was in place.

During an investigation by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman into the case, the Ombudsman found up to 400 other children were also potentially affected by delays.

In the siblings’ cases, one brother missed more than half the speech and language therapy, and almost all of the occupational therapy, which his Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan entitled him to between September 2023 and December 2024.

His brother also went without his speech and language therapy, and the council repeatedly delayed updating his plan, meaning his mother had no legal right to challenge the level of support he was getting.

The Ombudsman found the problems were partly due to the council's therapy provider ending its contract with a sub-contractor in early 2024 - potentially affecting nearly 400 children across Buckinghamshire.

The Ombudsman’s investigation found the council failed to properly consider the impact of withdrawing the contract, had no back-up plan, and failed to step in to ensure those children still got the help they were owed quickly enough.

Mrs Amerdeep Clarke, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, said:

"These are not simply cases of two children falling between the cracks of an overstretched service. Instead the council made wholescale changes to the way it provided support without ensuring it could meet the needs of these children and many others.

“Buckinghamshire Council did not do enough when it identified clear warning signs that the therapy hundreds of children and young people needed could not be delivered at the agreed level.

“Every child with an EHC Plan has a legal entitlement to the support set out in it. This case highlights what can go wrong when councils do not exercise sufficient oversight of the services they commission.

“When a provider struggles to meet demand, it is the council's responsibility to step in - not to wait and hope the situation improves.

“I welcome Buckinghamshire Council's agreement to make the service improvements I have recommended, and I hope this report serves as a reminder to councils across the country of their duties to children with SEND.”

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman remedies injustice and shares learning from investigations to help improve public, and adult social care, services. In this case the council has agreed to apologise to the boys’ mother and pay a symbolic £1,000 to recognise what has gone wrong.

The Ombudsman has the power to make recommendations to improve processes for the wider public. In this case the council has agreed to create a plan to show how it will address any shortfall in the needs of children and young people with EHC Plans whose needs are not currently being met through the therapy service.

It will also develop a protocol for cases where the therapy service cannot deliver provision in line with a child’s EHC plan.