scholarly journals Reforming to Please: A Comprehensive Explanation for Non-Exit from the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Hubert Smekal ◽  
Nino Tsereteli
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Reform Process ◽  
European Court ◽  
Perceptions And Expectations

States’ growing dissatisfaction with the performance of the European Court of Human Rights – Governments’ commitment to reform process – Threats of exit that failed to materialise – Adaptation of Hirschman’s exit–voice–loyalty framework to explain states’ non-exit from the European Court of Human Rights – Sufficiently effective voice, manifestations of loyalty, and high costs of exit as possible reasons behind non-exit – Governments’ inability to achieve change in the Court’s practice unilaterally – Divergent perceptions and expectations of governments – Court’s responsiveness to governments’ concerns – Showing the importance of cautious, incremental changes to accommodate diverse governmental expectations on the role of the European Court of Human Rights

Rola uzasadnienia sądowego w realizacji prawa do rzetelnego procesu sądowoadministracyjnego– standard strasburski

2014 ◽  
pp. 13-31
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Grzelak-Bach
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Basic Level

Following a brief introduction of article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the author begins by analyzing case law from the European Court of Human Rights regarding the legal reasoning in judicial proceedings. The main premise of this paper is to present a formula for preparing legal reasoning in administrative court proceedings. The author draws attention to the role of judges who, in the process of adjudication, should apply creative interpretation of the rules of law, when they see errors or omissions in legislative provisions, or blatant violations of the European legal order. The conclusion of those deliberations finds, that the process of tailoring the approach to meet Strasbourg’s requirements should, on a basic level, be at the discretion of judges rather than the legislators.

A rationale for the legitimacy of the world legal order: Kant’s idea of a cosmopolitan will

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 523-530
Author(s):  
CLAUDIO CORRADETTI
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
European Court ◽  
The World ◽  
Global Constitutionalism

AbstractIn this contribution I provide an interpretation of Stone Sweet’s and Ryan’s cosmopolitan legal order in conjunction with a certain reconstruction of the Kantian cosmopolitan rationale. Accordingly, I draw attention to the connection between the notion of a general (cosmopolitan) will in Kant’s reinterpretation of Rousseau and the role of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) as an ‘interpreter’ of such will. I conclude by suggesting that the opportunity of extending the CLO also accounts for a variety of other poliarchical regimes that, taken as a whole, illustrate the landscapes of contemporary global constitutionalism.

“Unity in Diversity” Reloaded: The European Court of Human Rights’ Turn to Subsidiarity and its Consequences

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-123
Author(s):  
Mikael Rask Madsen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Reform Process ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Unity In Diversity ◽  
The Common ◽  
Individual Justice

Abstract The European Convention of Human Rights system was originally created to sound the alarm if democracy was threatened in the member states. Yet, it eventually developed into a very different system with a focus on providing individual justice in an ever growing number of member states. This transformation has raised fundamental questions as to the level of difference and diversity allowed within the common European human rights space. Was the system to rest on minimum standards with room for domestic differences, or was it to create uniform standards? These questions have come up as increasingly contentious issues over the past years and have triggered a number of reforms seeking to introduce more subsidiarity in the system, striking a different balance between the European and national oversight of human rights. The article analyses this turn to subsidiarity by exploring whether the reform process has introduced new forms of difference and diversity within the common space of European human rights. Covering the period from 2000 to the end of 2019 and using a dataset of all judgments of the period, the article provides a structural analysis of developments in reference to the margin of appreciation which is the European Court of Human Rights’ long-standing tool for balancing the common standards, yet leaving space for individual member states to find local solutions to implementing those standards. It concludes that recent developments have contributed to a more federal-style construction of European human rights with more space for differences within the common general standards.

Conservative Anti-HRA Rhetoric, the Bill of Rights ‘Solution’ and the Role of the Bill of Rights Commission

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Fenwick
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Constitutional Reform ◽  
The Political ◽  
Coalition Government ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Conservative Government ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Advisory Role

This chapter considers proposals for changes that might be made by a British Bill of Rights, as compared with the Human Rights Act, under the Coalition government, or a future Conservative government. It considers views expressed by Conservative spokespersons prior to and after the 2010 general election, and answers given by members of the Bill of Rights Commission to the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee in 2011. This chapter also touches on the second aspect of the Commission's remit — its advisory role on reform of the European Court of Human Rights. It questions whether adopting a Bill of Rights on the lines favoured by the Conservative leadership, combined with the Strasbourg reforms recently determined on, would be likely to realise Conservative aims of creating divergence from Strasbourg and enhancing parliamentary autonomy.

The gypsy’s lot: myth and reality

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Jago
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Lived Experiences ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter focuses on the lived experiences of gypsies (collectively referred to as gypsies rather than Roma or travellers). The author argues that the relationship between the legal system and the specific lifestyle of this group is itself causing many tensions which cannot be separated from the long-held myths about gypsies. Jago shows how the standing of gypsies in the UK legal system has, in turn, become the object of various myths. He demonstrates how judgements by the European Court of Human Rights in favour of gypsy claims created in many an image of the law being always on the side of the gypsy. A perception which Jago demonstrates is far from true. After addressing the nature and role of myths in general the author illustrates the tension between positive, romanticised myths about the freedom of gypsy lifestyle and three derogatory myths, namely gypsies as "child-snatchers", as thieves and as "land grabbers". Jago illustrates that these myths are linked to deep-rooted beliefs around property and its ownership.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document