scholarly journals The Reception of the ECHR in National Legal Orders

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alec Stone Sweet ◽  
Helen Keller
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
Intractable Problems ◽  
The Face ◽  
New Institutions

This chapter begins by discussing the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Established in 1953, the ECHR created a basic catalogue of rights binding on the signatories, and new institutions charged with monitoring and enforcing compliance. The ECHR has since evolved into an intricate legal system. The High Contracting Parties have steadily upgraded the regime's scope and capacities, in successive treaty revisions. They have added new rights, enhanced the powers of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), and strengthened the links between individual applicants and the regime. Today, the Court is an important, autonomous source of authority on the nature and content of fundamental rights in Europe. In addition to providing justice in individual cases, it works to identify and to consolidate universal standards of rights protection, in the face of wide national diversity and a steady stream of seemingly intractable problems. The methodology used to analyze the case studies presented in the subsequent chapters is described.

9. Fundamental rights in the European Union

2020 ◽  
pp. 243-282
Author(s):  
Eleanor Spaventa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines fundamental rights in the EU. It begins by analysing the historical background and the development of the case law on fundamental rights. It then examines the main Treaty provisions relating to fundamental rights protection, before turning to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Finally, it looks at the relationship between the EU and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), including the extent to which the European Court of Human Rights agrees to scrutinize EU acts. It also considers the plan for the EU to accede to the ECHR.

Reconciling Extradition with Human Rights

1998 ◽  
Vol 92 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Dugard ◽  
Christine Van den Wyngaert
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
International Crime ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
General Interest ◽  
Law And Order ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Movement ◽  
New Institutions

The human rights movement, which has had such a powerful impact on international law and relations in the post—World War II period, has in recent years turned its attention to extradition. Treaties, executive acts and judicial decisions on extradition have all been affected. At the same time, transnational and international crime has increased. The international community has responded by creating new institutions and expanding the network of bilateral and multilateral treaties designed to outlaw transnational crime, promote extradition, and authorize mutual assistance. Inevitably, there is a tension between the claim for the inclusion of human rights in the extradition process and the demand for more effective international cooperation in the suppression of crime, which resembles the tension in many national legal systems between the “law and order” and human rights approaches to criminal justice. As in domestic society, it is necessary to strike a balance between the two so as to establish a system in which crime is suppressed and human rights are respected. This was stressed by the European Court of Human Rights in the leading case on extradition and human rights, Soering v. United Kingdom, when it stated: [I]nherent in the whole of the [European] Convention [on Human Rights] is a search for a fair balance between the demands of the general interest of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual’s fundamental rights. As movement about the world becomes easier and crime takes on a larger international dimension, it is increasingly in the interests of all nations that suspected offenders who flee abroad should be brought to justice. Conversely, the establishment of safe havens for fugitives would not only result in danger for the State obliged to harbour the protected person but also tend to undermine the foundations of extradition. These considerations must also be included among the factors to be taken into account in the interpretation and application of the notions of inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment in extradition cases.

The Right to Invoke Rights as a Limit to Sovereignty – Security Interests, State of Emergency and Review of un Sanctions by Domestic Courts under the European Convention of Human Rights

2017 ◽  
Vol 86 (3) ◽  
pp. 275-301 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Kadelbach ◽  
David Roth-Isigkeit
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Public Security ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
The Right

Recently, human rights law has been restricted increasingly by measures taken in the interest of public security. This raises the question whether there are limits in human rights protection that cannot be touched without questioning the very essence of individual rights protection itself. This article submits that the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in cases dealing with the compatibility of measures taken in the public interest with the echr has defined such limits predominantly in terms of procedure. Accordingly, individuals must not be deprived of the right to independent review in the light of their fundamental rights. Thus, the Court has been developing what may be called a right to invoke rights, a procedural component underlying all guarantees of the Convention. This principle has been established and upheld in three different constellations: general measures for public security, states of emergencies and the implementation of un sanctions regimes.

The Impact of the ECHR and of Pan-European General Principles of Good Administration on the Administrative Law of Portugal

2020 ◽  
pp. 377-402
Author(s):  
Rui Tavares Lanceiro
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Complete Evaluation ◽  
European Court ◽  
Democratic Revolution ◽  
The Impact

This chapter explores the impact on Portuguese administrative law of the pan-European principles of good administration developed within the framework of the Council of Europe (CoE). It highlights that ratification of the European Convention on Human Rights has helped to deepen democracy and safeguard the protection of fundamental rights, not only in the direct aftermath of the democratic revolution of 25 April 1974 which brought down the dictatorship of the “Estado Novo” regime but up to today. The chapter further argues that numerous cases at the European Court of Human Rights have resulted in reforms to the Portuguese legal system, especially concerning fair trial requirements. At the same time the influence of other CoE conventions and recommendations remains somewhat limited. The chapter concludes that the overall impact of the pan-European principles of good administration has not been properly studied and, thus, complete evaluation thereof is not possible.

9. Fundamental rights in the European Union

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleanor Spaventa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines fundamental rights in the EU. It begins by analysing the historical background and the development of the case law on fundamental rights. It then examines the main Treaty provisions relating to fundamental rights protection, before turning to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Finally, it looks at the relationship between the EU and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), including the extent to which the European Court of Human Rights agrees to scrutinize EU acts. It also considers the draft agreement on the EU’s accession to the ECHR.

Standardy należytego uzasadnienia w świetle orzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego i Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka

2014 ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Przemysław Florjanowicz-Błachut
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Judicial Reasoning ◽  
The Right

The core function of the judiciary is the administration of justice through delivering judgments and other decisions. The crucial role for its acceptance and legitimization by not only lawyers, but also individulas (parties) and the hole society plays judicial reasoning. It should reflect on judge’s independence within the exercise of his office and show also judicial self-restraint or activism. The axiology and the standards of proper judicial reasoning are anchored both in constitutional and supranational law and case-law. Polish Constitutional Tribunal derives a duty to give reasoning from the right to a fair trial – right to be heard and bring own submissions before the court (Article 45 § 1 of the Constitution), the right to appeal against judgments and decisions made at first stage (Article 78), the rule of two stages of the court proceedings (Article 176) and rule of law clause (Article 2), that comprises inter alia right to due process of law and the rule of legitimate expactation / the protection of trust (Vertrauensschutz). European Court of Human Rights derives this duty to give reasons from the guarantees of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Article 6 § 1 of European Convention of Human Rights. In its case-law the ECtHR, taking into account the margin of appreciation concept, formulated a number of positive and negative requirements, that should be met in case of proper reasoning. The obligation for courts to give sufficient reasons for their decisions is also anchored in European Union law. European Court of Justice derives this duty from the right to fair trial enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Standards of the courts reasoning developed by Polish constitutional court an the European courts (ECJ and ECtHR) are in fact convergent and coherent. National judges should take them into consideration in every case, to legitimize its outcome and enhance justice delivery.

Fundamental Rights Protection between Strasbourg and Luxembourg

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katalin Ligeti
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Grand Chamber

Since long before the entry into force of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFREU), the two highest courts in Europe, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) have sought to develop their respective jurisprudence in such a way as to ensure a strong protection of individual rights, whilst avoiding clashes between the decisions taken in Luxembourg and Strasbourg. An important statement in this regard is provided by the Bosphorus judgment, in which the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR recognised the existence of a presumption of equivalent protection of fundamental rights under EU law. The presumption is rebuttable, but expresses the trustful attitude (and a certain degree of deference) of Strasbourg towards the ability of EU law (and of the CJEU) to protect Convention rights.

22. Europe

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Greer Steven
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Historical Development ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Key Characteristics ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
State Organizations

This chapter examines the origins, historical development, and key characteristics of the various inter-state organizations engaged in human rights activities in Europe. Having briefly described the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, it examines the Council of Europe and the European Union, including the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Court of Human Rights and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

1 The Court Over Sixty Years

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nussberger Angelika
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Peace Treaty ◽  
Member States ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Violent Conflicts

This introductory chapter provides a background of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), a multilateral treaty based on humanism and rule of law. Similar to the—albeit non-binding—Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the ECHR is a document that marks a change in philosophy and gives a new definition of the responsibility of the State towards the individual. It fixes basic values in times of change and paves the way towards reconciliation in Europe. Unlike in a peace treaty, not all wartime enemies participate in its elaboration, but, one by one, all the European States accede to it, signalling their consent to the values fixed by a small community of States in the early 1950s. Seven decades later, forty-seven European States have ratified the Convention. Admittedly, the new start based on common values could not prevent the outbreak of violent conflicts between Member States. At the same time, the resurgence of anti-democratic tendencies could not be successfully banned in all Member States, but such tendencies could be stigmatized as grave human rights violations in binding judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Thus, it is not surprising that the European model of human rights protection has been attractive and inspirational for other parts of the world. Nevertheless, there was and is a debate in some Member States to withdraw from the Convention as the Court’s jurisprudence is seen to be too intrusive on national sovereignty.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document