Giving law graduates their first real experience
Every year, able law graduates leave university with a sound command of human rights law and no way of showing that they can practise it. The Human Rights Litigation Project gives them their first files: for six months, each participant works on real, confidential cases before the European Court of Human Rights, supervised individually by a Grand Chamber litigator, up to the level of the Grand Chamber.
- 20places at most, all partners together
- 800+applications in one week to our first call
- 1:1individual supervision, online
- 6months of supervised practice
I The gap we close
Qualified, but not yet experienced
Employers, law firms, NGOs and international organisations ask for experience. Experience is gained in a post; the post requires experience. Many good graduates never break that circle, and the knowledge their universities gave them is never put to work.
The response to our first call showed how wide that gap is: more than 800 applications arrived within a single week, from graduates who did not lack knowledge, but an opportunity. That call opened our first programme. It started independently of any university, with a first group of 40 participants in Belgium, and is designed to take 40 candidates per country across Europe. This proposal concerns the second programme: the same practice, now linked to universities, so that the experience can also lead to a certificate, issued by the university itself.
The Human Rights Litigation Project was created to give them one. It is not another course about the European Convention on Human Rights. It is a period of supervised work on the Convention: reading files, testing admissibility, researching the case-law, building arguments and drafting the documents that are actually lodged in Strasbourg, each one reviewed by a practising Grand Chamber litigator.
Graduates do not lack knowledge. What they lack is their first file.
The premise of the programme
- 01
Real work
Applications, third-party interventions and Grand Chamber referral requests, drafted on concrete files.
- 02
Individual supervision
Each participant is guided one to one, online, by a lawyer who litigates before the Grand Chamber.
- 03
Proof
A Litigation Practice Record that sets out, item by item, what the participant has actually done.
II The programme at a glance
Exclusive by design
The programme is deliberately small and fee-paying. Its value lies in the quality of the supervision, and that cannot be stretched.
- Duration
- Six months.
- Format
- Online and individual: each participant is supervised one to one by the programme director, on confidential files of the practice.
- Strasbourg
- Where possible, participation in a case before the Grand Chamber handled by the programme director, including the hearing in Strasbourg; a visit to the Court; additional workshops by arrangement.
- Workload
- Set with each partner university, so that the programme can be combined with a first job or further study.
- Cohort
- No more than twenty participants, across all partner universities, each supervised individually.
- Eligibility
- A law degree, with academic criteria agreed with each partner university.
- Languages
- English; a working knowledge of French, the Court's second official language, is an advantage.
- Recognition
- Any certificate is decided and issued by the partner university itself, under its own procedures. The programme does not issue certificates.
- Fees
- A fee-paying programme. Each partner university decides how its graduates take part; the financial terms are set out in a separate annex, available on request.
III Six months
Six months of real practice
Six months is long enough to follow cases through their stages, and short enough to stay intense. Each month has its own focus; together they cover the full cycle of Strasbourg litigation.
- Month 1The file and the Court
- Months 2–3The application and Chamber proceedings
- Month 4Third-party interventions
- Month 5The Grand Chamber
- Month 6Capstone and assessment
What participants take away
- Recognition
University certificate
Decided and issued by the partner university itself, under its own procedures. The programme does not issue certificates.
- Proof
Litigation Practice Record
A verifiable record of the cases worked on, the documents drafted and the competences assessed.
- Reference
Letter of reference
Signed by the programme director, for participants who complete the programme with merit.
IV What participants learn to do
The work, phase by phase
Each phase ends with a written piece of the kind a litigation practice produces, reviewed and returned before the next phase begins.
-
Month 1
The file and the Court
The Convention system, the Rules of Court and the application form. Admissibility as the Court applies it: victim status, exhaustion of domestic remedies, the four-month time limit and significant disadvantage.
Written work: an admissibility memorandum on a final domestic judgment.
-
Months 2–3
The individual application and Chamber proceedings
Identifying the complaints a file really contains, setting out the facts, and drafting the application with its supporting memorandum. Then the Chamber stage: case strategy, replying to the observations of a respondent Government, and reading a judgment for what it decides and what it leaves open.
Written work: a complete draft application and a reply to Government observations.
-
Month 4
Third-party interventions
Article 36 § 2 of the Convention and Rule 44 of the Rules of Court. How an intervention adds something the parties cannot: comparative law, European consensus and the systemic effect of a judgment across the Council of Europe's 46 member States.
Written work: draft written observations within the page limit the Court usually sets.
-
Month 5
The Grand Chamber
Article 43 and the Court's practice direction on referral requests: when a case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention, or a serious issue of general importance. How to show this from the facts and the case-law, without simply disagreeing with the Chamber.
Written work: a request for referral to the Grand Chamber.
-
Month 6
Capstone
One complete file, from first reading to final submission, followed by an oral presentation before a panel that includes an academic from the partner university.
Assessment and issue of the Litigation Practice Record.
IV How the work is done
Nothing is written for the drawer
The method is that of a litigation practice, not of a classroom. Each participant is supervised individually, online, by the programme director, who carries the professional responsibility for every file. The work is done on confidential files of the practice, at the level at which they are litigated: the participant receives a brief, drafts under a deadline and receives the work back with written comments, line by line, followed by a one-to-one review. These are real cases before the European Court of Human Rights, many of them still confidential. They reach the practice in two ways: through applicants who instruct it directly, and through a European human rights litigation body whose name will be made public at a later stage.
- Day 1
The brief
An individual online session presents the file, the question and the deadline.
- Days 2–6
Drafting
The participant studies the case-law and drafts; the supervisor is available for questions.
- Day 7
Submission
The draft is submitted, as it would be to the Registry.
- Following week
Review
Written comments on every draft, then a one-to-one review.
From case file to legal submission
- Review the facts
- Identify the legal issues
- Research the Strasbourg case-law
- Draft
- Receive feedback
- Revise
- Supervised portfolio
Not every draft is lodged with the Court, but every draft is written and reviewed as if it would be. Over six months each participant produces at least twelve reviewed pieces of written work. The aim is the habit that distinguishes a litigator: reading the file closely, knowing the case-law precisely, and writing for a court that has little time.
V Proof of experience
The Litigation Practice Record
What makes this programme different is what the participant takes away: not a statement that a course was followed, but evidence of what was done.
- 01
The university certificate
Where the partner university so decides, formal recognition by the university itself, under its own rules.
- 02
The record of work
An itemised statement of the cases on which the participant worked, as far as confidentiality allows, of the hours of practical work and of every document drafted: its type, the Convention articles, the procedural stage and the State involved.
- 03
The competence assessment
Six litigation competences, each assessed by the supervisor on a four-level scale.
- 04
The portfolio
A selection of the participant's best work, anonymised and cleared for use in applications for employment.
- 05
The reference
A letter signed by the programme director, for participants who complete the programme with merit.
- 06
Verification
Each Record carries a unique number. An employer can confirm its authenticity directly with the programme.
Human Rights Litigation Project
Litigation Practice Record
No. HRLP-2027-0014
- Participant
- [Name of participant]
- Partner university
- [University]
- Programme
- Six months
- Period
- January – June 2027
Work drafted
- Admissibility memoranda
- 3 · Arts. 3, 6, 8
- Individual applications
- 2 · Arts. 5, 6 § 1
- Reply to Government
- 1 · Art. 8
- Third-party intervention
- 1 · Art. 10
- Referral request
- 1 · Art. 6 § 3 (d)
Competences
- Admissibility analysis
- Research in the case-law
- Drafting
- Strategic judgment
Programme director
The six competences assessed
Each competence is assessed on four levels: Foundation, Competent, Proficient and Advanced. The levels describe what the participant can do without help, so that an employer knows what to expect on the first day.
| Competence | What is assessed |
|---|---|
| Admissibility analysis | Identifying the admissibility issues in a file and assessing them as the Court would. |
| Research in the case-law | Finding the relevant judgments and decisions, and reading them for their principles rather than their outcome. |
| Drafting | Producing clear, structured and concise documents that respect the Court's formal requirements. |
| Strategic judgment | Choosing which complaints to raise, which arguments to lead with, and when not to proceed. |
| Written advocacy | Persuading in English, and where possible in French, in the register the Court expects. |
| Professional conduct | Confidentiality, deadlines and reliability within a litigation practice. |
Assessment
The proposed weighting is as follows: continuous assessment of written work, 50 per cent; the capstone file, 35 per cent; the oral presentation, 15 per cent. Whether a certificate is issued, and on what conditions, is decided by the partner university under its own examination rules.
VI Who leads the programme
Taught by a Grand Chamber litigator
Zouhaier Chihaoui is a lawyer at the Brussels Bar (Dutch-speaking Bar) and a specialist in litigation before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights. He also acts before the Court of Justice of the European Union.
He is the founder of Just Rights Europe, a practice devoted entirely to European human rights litigation, for applicants from every member State of the Council of Europe.
He is also the founder of the Human Rights Litigation Foundation, which brings third-party interventions before the Grand Chamber, and a co-founder of Jus Cogens.
From 2016 to 2018 he led a practice-based legal clinic at Ghent University, the experience on which this programme builds.
Before the Grand Chamber
- M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece
- Bouyid v. Belgium
- Lhermitte v. Belgium
- Miladze v. Georgia · third-party intervention, request lodged
Interventions in several other Grand Chamber cases are in preparation; they cannot be named for reasons of confidentiality.
Areas of practice
Grand Chamber
Requests for referral, proceedings before the Grand Chamber and third-party interventions.
European Court of Human Rights
Individual applications from every member State of the Council of Europe.
Court of Justice of the EU
Preliminary references concerning fundamental rights.
VI The Grand Chamber
At the level of the Grand Chamber
The Grand Chamber decides the questions that shape the Convention for all 46 member States. That is the level at which this programme works.
Participants work on the instruments of Grand Chamber litigation: the request for referral under Article 43, the written proceedings before the Grand Chamber, and third-party interventions under Article 36 § 2 of the Convention and Rule 44 of the Rules of Court.
Where a case handled by the programme director is before the Grand Chamber, participants may take part in its preparation and attend the hearing in Strasbourg. Few lawyers see a Grand Chamber case from the inside. Participants in this programme can.
Third-party interventions
Through the Human Rights Litigation Foundation, the practice brings third-party interventions in cases that raise a question beyond the parties. In October 2026 it lodged a request for leave to intervene before the Grand Chamber in Miladze v. Georgia, and further interventions in Grand Chamber cases are in preparation, which cannot be named for reasons of confidentiality. This work is a permanent part of the practice, and of the programme: participants identify the cases in which an intervention can add comparative law, European consensus or a systemic perspective, and draft the observations under supervision.
VII Supervision, ethics and confidentiality
Real files, handled with professional care
Working on real files is what gives the programme its value. It is also why the rules are strict.
- 01
Professional responsibility
All work is done under the supervision of a lawyer who bears full professional responsibility for it. Participants never sign, lodge or represent; the programme confers no right of audience before any court.
- 02
Live files
Participants work on confidential files of the practice where the client has consented, a conflict check has been made and the law allows it. Where that is not possible, the material is anonymised.
- 03
Confidentiality
Every participant signs a confidentiality undertaking, and access to each confidential file is granted individually, only once it has been approved. Files are shared through a secure platform with controlled access, in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation.
- 04
Interventions
A third-party intervention is lodged only with the leave of the President of the Court, under Rule 44 of the Rules of Court. Drafting one is part of the training; filing one is a professional decision.
- 05
Honesty about recognition
The programme is not a master's degree. Recognition is given by the partner university, through its own procedures, as a certificate of continuing or postgraduate education. The Practice Record describes the work actually done; it is not presented as a formal legal traineeship.
Faculty
Partner universities are invited to associate members of their own faculty with the programme, for the academic sessions, the capstone panels and the joint academic committee. Guest practitioners contribute to specific phases.
Admission
Selection takes place in three steps: a written application with a curriculum vitae and a statement of motivation; a short written exercise on admissibility; and an interview. The partner university verifies academic eligibility. A joint academic committee, with a representative of each certifying partner and the programme director, oversees standards and meets every quarter.
VIII The partnership
What we propose to universities
For a university, the programme adds what is hardest to build in-house: supervised practice in Strasbourg litigation, with an outcome its graduates can show to employers.
- Model A
Founding partner
Joins the pilot cohort, helps to shape the programme and holds a seat on the joint academic committee from the outset.
- Model B
Certifying partner
Issues the university certificate, verifies eligibility and takes part in the final assessment.
- Model C
Academic partner
Contributes faculty and research perspectives, and offers the programme to its graduates, without issuing a certificate.
| Responsibility | Partner university | Programme |
|---|---|---|
| Recruitment | Presents the programme to its graduates and alumni; checks eligibility. | Organises selection: written exercise and interview. |
| Teaching | Academic sessions and comparative perspectives. | Litigation instruction, case selection and drafting exercises. |
| Supervision | Academic oversight through the joint committee. | Individual supervision and review of all written work. |
| Assessment | Takes part in the capstone panel; sets examination rules. | Continuous assessment and the Practice Record. |
| Certification | Issues the university certificate, once approved. | Issues and verifies the Practice Record. |
IX From first meeting to first cohort
An indicative timetable
Universities that wish to join the first cohort are invited to confirm their participation by 30 November 2026. The programme then starts in January 2027, at the beginning of the second semester. Universities that prefer to start with the new academic year can join the second intake in September 2027. The length and rhythm of the programme can be fitted to each university's semesters. Where a university's approval procedure takes longer, participants can begin and the university certificate is issued once approval has been obtained.
Universities confirm their participation.
Selection of the first participants.
The first cohort begins, by 31 January.
First Practice Records issued.
Second intake, aligned with the new academic year.
Fees and places
The programme is fee-paying, and each university is free to shape its own participation. Places are open: a university may purchase one or several of the twenty places for its own students and graduates, offer them to its best candidates, fund scholarships, or set its own fee for participants who enrol through it.
A university may also choose a lasting partnership, with places reserved every year for a larger group. Everything is open to discussion, including the timing, which we adapt to each university's calendar. The financial terms are set out in a separate annex, available on request.
The programme and its training handbook
Where the programme is heading
The Human Rights Litigation Project, part of the Just Rights Europe Education Programme From the First Application to the Grand Chamber, trains a small number of law graduates to the level at which they can actually litigate before the European Court of Human Rights. It is built in three stages. The universities do not co-organise the programme; they are invited to take part in it, each on terms suited to its own students.
| Stage | What it is |
|---|---|
| 1 Pilot | The pilot, already under way. Participants acquire practical experience on real cases. The first call attracted some 800 applications in one week. |
| 2 University | The stage to which a small number of universities are now invited. The best graduates of each partner university gain real litigation experience before the Court, in groups of one to five participants per university. |
| 3 Grand Chamber Masterclass | The advanced part of the programme: referral to the Grand Chamber, the Grand Chamber proceedings and interventions, the critical analysis of Grand Chamber judgments, the oral hearing and strategy. |
The programme for universities
| Item | In brief |
|---|---|
| Duration | Six months, followed online |
| Supervision | One-to-one, by Zouhaier Chihaoui, on real case files under his professional responsibility |
| Material | Twelve Training Notes in two parts, delivered one by one — Part I, the European Court of Human Rights (Notes 1 to 5); Part II, the Grand Chamber Masterclass (Notes 6 to 12). Each note gives the rules, a method, the case-law, a model and a piece of work on a real case |
| Outcome | A portfolio of case analyses and draft pleadings, with individual written feedback. Work on pending cases depends on their procedural stage and client consent. A Litigation Practice Record; the university may assess and certify |
| Languages | English or French — the two official languages of the Court |
| Places | One to five per university; twenty in total for the first cohort |
| Start | January 2027, or September 2027 |
The programme and its training handbook
The twelve Training Notes
The Training Notes follow a case through the European Court of Human Rights, in two parts: first the Court and its Chambers, then the Grand Chamber.
Part I · The European Court of Human Rights — The Chambers
- 01Finding a Case for a Third-Party Intervention17 pages
- 02Writing the Third-Party Intervention37 pages
- 03Identifying and Assessing an Applicant's Case26 pages
- 04Preparing and Lodging an ECtHR Application15 pages
- 05Written Observations and Chamber Litigation17 pages
Part II · The Grand Chamber Masterclass
- 06Grand Chamber Referral — Article 43 ECHR19 pages
- 07Litigation before the Grand Chamber15 pages
- 08Strategic Third-Party Interventions before the Grand Chamber18 pages
- 09Critical Reasoning before the Grand Chamber and Critical Analysis of Grand Chamber Judgments17 pages
- 10Pleading before the Grand Chamber — the Oral Hearing12 pages
- 11The Grand Chamber and the RATCHET Method — Critical and Strategic Grand Chamber Analysis11 pages
- 12Behind the Scenes: Building a Grand Chamber Case — Bouyid, M.S.S. and Lhermitte10 pages
All twelve Training Notes are written and are part of the programme.
An invitation to talk
We invite the Dean, the director of postgraduate programmes or the continuing education team to a first conversation: on academic fit, certification, the participation of faculty and a possible pilot cohort.
A small number of universities will be invited to become founding partners. We would be glad if yours were among them.
Contact
Zouhaier Chihaoui
Programme director · Advocaat, Brussels Bar
zc@justrights.be
+32 485 87 16 55
Landsroemlaan 40 · 1083 Brussels · Belgium
From knowledge to real cases · From graduates to impact