The European Convention on Human Rights*1 must be altered.

A forbidden nature of individual applications causing their dismissal by judges of offices of the European Court of Human Rights is an object of this examination.

This article means to learn whether certain arrangements of the European Convention on Human Rights relating to discovering singular applications forbidden, causing a dismissal of such applications, fall in consistence with the standards of the Rule of law and with the general regulation of Judicial Review.

A need for such an exploration of the point follows from various realities when judges of offices of the European Court of Human Rights, while acting in singular limit ( for example the supposed single appointed authorities) with capability referenced in Article 27 of the European Convention on Human Rights embrace their choices which keep the Court from further making a careful legal investigation to benefits and realities of utilizations got. One of the demonstrating instances of this is the reality as follows.

Since 2007 the Kyiv Circuit court of Ukraine has not been hearing a claim of the Association of Independent law specialists and writers “The Democratic Space” (here and after – the Association) submitted against the Ukrainian State for example against: the leader of Ukraine; the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine; the Ukrainian parliament; the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine; the State Savings Bank of Ukraine. The claim’s necessity under the watchful eye of the court was: to order a judgment which could express that the Ukrainian State damaged the legal right of Ukrainian nationals to get back their economies at any point kept by them in banking offices of the then Soviet Ukraine, before 02 January 1992, and which had not been come back to them from that point forward.