scholarly journals Globalisation and Court Practice in Iceland: New Case Law of the Supreme Court in Relation to the EEA Agreement and European Convention on Human Rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 151-165
Author(s):  
Halldóra Thorsteinsdóttir
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
International Obligation ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Court Practice

AbstractThis article examines the status of international treaties in Iceland law and how Icelandic court practice has developed in recent years in that area. With regard to the relationship between domestic law and international law, Iceland adheres to the principle of dualism. This means that international law does not come into force as Icelandic law unless implemented by the legislator. As a result, Icelandic Courts will not, in general, apply provisions of international treaties unless they have been incorporated into Icelandic statutory law. However, this does not mean that international obligation are not fulfilled, as Icelandic Courts will seek to interpret domestic law in line with international obligation to the extent possible. If an international treaty has been implemented into Icelandic law, its provisions are binding like other domestic law. With regard to the EEA Agreement, Icelandic Courts will seek to interpret national law in accordance with EEA obligations and follow the judgments of the EFTA Court if the Icelandic provision in question is open to such an interpretation. With regard to the European Convention on Human Rights, Icelandic Courts will even go a step further, as recent judgments show that Icelandic Courts tend to interpret the human rights provisions of the Icelandic Constitution in line with interpretation laid down by The European Court of Human Rights, even in cases where such an interpretation does not exactly fit within the direct wording of the provision in question. This is due to a special connection between the human rights chapter of the Icelandic Constitution and the Convention, as one of the legislators’ main goals when amending the Constitution in 1994 was to bring the human rights chapter more in line with the Convention.

scholarly journals The problem of applying reservations to international human rights agreements

2021 ◽  
pp. 68-73
Author(s):  
Ivanna Maryniv ◽  
Liubov Rudai
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
International Human

A problem statement. Human rights law, as a branch of public international law, to date, is mainly codified and consists mainly of treaty rules contained in universal and regional conventions. At the same time, in most cases, the parties to these agreements make reservations of both a substantive and procedural nature that apply to all generations of human rights. The question arises as to the legitimacy of the reservations declared by states to international acts on human rights and freedoms. Аnalysis of research and publications. Many international lawyers deal with the issue of reservations to human rights treaties and their validity. Thus, the works of E.S. Alisievich, are devoted to this issue, I.I. Lukashuk, V.G. Butkevich, V.L. Tolstoy, M.V. Buromensky and others. However, there are a number of problems with the legal regime of reservations to human rights treaties. The main thesis that reveals their essence is that there is no mechanism for effective control over the legitimacy of such reservations. The main text. The article considers the concept of reservations to international treaties, examines the problem of issuing reservations to international human rights treaties. The application of the institution of reservations is studied on the example of certain international treaties in the field of human rights, such as: the European Convention on Human Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the application of reservations to the European Convention on Human Rights is studied. Conclusions. Today, the sovereign right of every state to stipulate international treaties is firmly established in international law, but there is no clear legal regulation of this institution that would prevent abuses by states in this area. We see the need to further study the institution of reservations to human rights treaties, its development and the development of general principles, procedures, and control over their legitimacy.

The Status of International Treaties in the Legal System of Azerbaijan

2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-256
Author(s):  
Cavid Abdullahzade
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Independent State ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Status ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights

AbstractAs part of the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Azerbaijan Republic ended its protracted existence as one of the fifteen members of the Soviet Union and became an independent state. As a result, on 30 August 1991, she became a full subject of international law. Currently, Azerbaijan is a party to a number of international treaties, virtually all major human rights treaties registered with the UN Secretary-General, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as well as a number of related Council of Europe human rights agreements.A tendency towards internationalization and a general 'opening' to international law can also be seen in the Azeri Constitution, which was adopted by public referendum on 12 November 1995. Like many other former Soviet Republics, Azerbaijan, in its 1995 Constitution, has rejected the traditional Soviet dualist approach of the implementation of international law in the domestic legal system and has established a monist system within the context of a relationship between national and international law. This article discusses these changes in the Azeri attitude towards international law, in particular the status of international treaties, with special reference to those problems stemming from the implementation of international treaties in the domestic legal system of Azerbaijan.

scholarly journals Access to Healthcare for Minors: An Ethical Analysis of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 1361
Author(s):  
Fabian-Alexander Tietze ◽  
Marcin Orzechowski ◽  
Marianne Nowak ◽  
Florian Steger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Access To Healthcare ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Healthcare Provision ◽  
Qualitative Thematic Analysis ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right

The right to non-discriminatory access to healthcare is anchored in the European Convention on Human Rights and other international treaties or guidelines. Since its ratification, the European Convention on Human Rights was made binding in all Member States of the Council of Europe and is interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Despite its legal recognition, discrimination in healthcare provision has repeatedly been an issue of medicoethical and political consideration. In this context, minors are particularly in danger of being deprived of this fundamental right. The aim of this study is to analyze the current state of the ECtHR jurisdiction on challenges in accessing healthcare for minor patients. We conducted a systematic search of judgments by the ECtHR using the keywords “healthcare” and “child”. We performed descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis. Our search resulted in n = 66 judgments, which were all screened. Access to healthcare for minors played a role in n = 21 judgments, which involved applications against n = 13 countries. We formed five, partially overlapping categories, which represent recurring themes regarding the research topic. These themes are governance failure (n = 11), the status of refugee, asylum seeker or migrant (n = 5), parental home (n = 5), maternity and birth (n = 4) and others (n = 2). The normative framework of the ECtHR’s jurisprudence illustrates intersections between social, legal and medicoethical aspects of minors’ discrimination in the healthcare system. It emphasizes the particular vulnerability of children, who require exceptional protection. Inadequate access to healthcare manifests itself in specific situations, such as in the context of migration or staying in public institutions. Healthcare professionals need to be sensitized for such discrimination mechanisms, as they are often at the forefront of encountering structural discrimination in the healthcare system.

The Effect of Subsequent Practice on the European Convention on Human Rights

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja Seibert-Fohr
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Degree Of Acceptance ◽  
Treaty Interpretation ◽  
Normative Value

Under which conditions and to what extent can subsequent State practice legitimately influence the interpretation or even modify international treaties? This issue of general international law has been on the European Court of Human Rights’ agenda for quite some time and is ongoing as evidenced in Hassan v The United Kingdom. While State practice has traditionally played a role in the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights in its dynamic interpretation, the Court’s methodology to determine under what circumstance and to what extent State practice is able to affect the scope and meaning of the Convention remains uncertain. This chapter develops a general theoretical framework, which rationalizes the normative value of subsequent practice in the context of human rights treaty interpretation and sets out its relevant standards. Drawing from the International Law Commission’s work on ‘Subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to interpretation of treaties’, the author argues that the Vienna rules provide a useful point of departure without the need for additional means of interpretation. This matrix allows sufficient flexibility to accommodate the specific nature of human rights law. The author proposes a normative scale, which can guide the Court in enhancing its methodological consistency. Pursuant to this scale, exigencies for the density of subsequent practice and the degree of acceptance pursuant to Article 38(1)(b) VCLT vary depending on the nature of the rule and the claimed normative value of State practice. Once State practice meets the required standard, it can sustain the legitimacy of treaty interpretation and serve as a catalyst for the advancement of human rights.

scholarly journals International Obligations of Unrecognized State. The Case of Transdnistrian Moldavian Republic

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-93
Author(s):  
Galina Shinkaretskaia
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
International Community ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
The Status ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
The Republic

Unrecognized states are formations separated themselves from another state and had declared itself a new self-standing state. The inner structure of the formation does not differ from the structure of other states in that it possesses a constitution, legal system and state bodies. But such a formation is not recognized by the international community in the capacity of a subject of international law or is recognized by a minor number of states.Unrecognized states do not have interstate treaties with UN members, yet this does not mean that no international obligations are obligatory for them. General principles of international law and peremptory norms are obligatory notwithstanding recognition. Moreover, unrecognized state sometimes accept voluntarily international obligations of some treaties, still they are not recognized as parties thereof. The status of unrecognized states differ from the status of other actors not states in international relations: sometimes intrastate or even non-governmental organizations, e.g. European union, are accepted as parties to international treaties. Unrecognized states can never become parties to international treaties. Thus a situation of irresponsibility is created, when an unrecognized state has no partners who could question a responsibility in case of a breach of international law; neither the jurisdiction of treaty bodies created to monitor implementation of the treaty obligations.Transdnistrian Moldavian Republic is a good illustration here. Its Constitution contains a rule that the generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties are a part of its legal system. The Republic does not have interstate treaties, but accepted some normative acts on the recognition of the most important human rights treaties. This is in fact a joining of the Republic to the treaties. Yet the Republic is not a party to them because the Vienna Convention on the law of international treaties 1969 allows only the subjects of international law to conclude international treaties which unrecognized Transdnistria is not. Thus the situation is created where the international community cannot submit a claim of failure to fulfill a treaty to Transdnistria.We submit that this is not so with generally recognized norms and principles because an obligation is emerging in the contemporary international law that all actors of international intercourse must fulfill those principles and norms. The events around the indictment of the former President of the Republic are a good example of breach of international law. The Republic broke the European Convention on human rights which diminished the acceptance of international law by the Republic.

Framing a Convention Community

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cedric Marti
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Nation State ◽  
International Agreement ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Interdisciplinary Perspective ◽  
European Court ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Law Making

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) has evolved from an international agreement into a highly integrated legal community with an ever more pervasive effect on domestic law and individuals. The supranational authority of the European Court of Human Rights bypasses the nation state in a growing number of other areas. Understanding the evolution of the ECHR and its Court may help in explaining and contextualising growing resistance against the Court, and in developing possible responses. Examining the Convention system through the prism of supranationality, Cedric Marti offers a fresh, comprehensive and interdisciplinary perspective on the expanding adjudicatory powers of the Court, including law-making. Marti addresses the growing literature of institutional studies on human rights enforcement to ascertain the particularities of the ECHR and its relationship to domestic legal systems. This study will be of great value to both scholars of international law and human rights practitioners.

The European Convention on Human Rights and International Law

2007 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luzius Wildhaber
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Mutual Relationship ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Special Character ◽  
British Institute

AbstractThis article is an expanded and footnoted version of the lectur given at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law on Tuesday 21 March 2006, entitled ‘International Law in the European Court of Human Rights’.The article begins with some comparative comments on the application of the European Convention on Human Rights in monistic and dualistic systems It then discusses in detail the European Court's case law which confirms that the Convention, despite its special character as a human rights treaty, is indeed part of public international law. It concludes that the Convention and international law find themselves in a kind of interactive mutual relationship. checking and buildine on each other.

Bringing People Down

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 433-466
Author(s):  
John Vorhaus
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Corporal Punishment ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Relational Concept ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
As If

Under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, degrading treatment and punishment is absolutely prohibited. This paper examines the nature of and wrong inherent in treatment and punishment of this kind. Cases brought before the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) as amounting to degrading treatment and punishment under Article 3 include instances of interrogation, conditions of confinement, corporal punishment, strip searches, and a failure to provide adequate health care. The Court acknowledges the degradation inherent in imprisonment generally, and does not consider this to be in violation of Article 3, but it also identifies a threshold at which degradation is so severe as to render impermissible punishments that cross this threshold. I offer an account of the Court’s conception of impermissible degradation as a symbolic dignitary harm. The victims are treated as inferior, as if they do not possess the status owed to human beings, neither treated with dignity nor given the respect owed to dignity. Degradation is a relational concept: the victim is brought down in the eyes of others following treatment motivated by the intention to degrade, or treatment which has a degrading effect. This, so I will argue, is the best account of the concept of degradation as deployed by the Court when determining punishments as in violation of Article 3.

scholarly journals Khlaifia and Others v. Italy

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (2) ◽  
pp. 274-280
Author(s):  
Jill I. Goldenziel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Detention Centers ◽  
European Court ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Arab Spring ◽  
Domestic Law

In Khlaifia and Others v. Italy, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber or Court) released a landmark opinion with broad implications for how states must respect the individual rights of migrants. In the judgment, issued on December 15, 2016, the Court held that Italy's treatment of migrants after the Arab Spring violated the requirement of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) that migrants receive procedural guarantees that enable them to challenge their detention and expulsion. The Court also held that Italy's treatment of migrants in detention centers did not violate the ECHR's prohibition on cruel and inhuman treatment, in part due to the emergency circumstances involved. The Court further held that Italy's return of migrants to Tunisia did not violate the prohibition on collective expulsion in Article 4 of Protocol 4 of the ECHR. Enforcement of the judgment would require many European states to provide a clear basis in domestic law for the detention of migrants and asylum-seekers. Given the global diffusion of state practices involving migrants, and other states’ desires to restrict migration, this case has broad implications for delineating the obligations of states to migrants and the rights of migrants within receiving countries.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document