4. Interpreting the Convention

Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey ◽  
Elizabeth Wicks ◽  
Andclare Ovey

This chapter analyses the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It explains that there are key themes which have dominated the interpretation of the Convention: the purposive and the evolutive interpretations. The chapter describes the approach of the Strasbourg Court to the interpretation of the ECHR and evaluates the influence of the Vienna Convention. It suggests that the interpretation of the Convention builds on the rules of public international law on the interpretation of treaties and has remained broadly consistent with those principles, and that the role of the Strasbourg Court is casuistic.

2020 ◽  
pp. 63-83
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey ◽  
Pamela McCormick ◽  
Clare Ovey

This chapter analyses the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It explains that there are two key themes which have dominated the interpretation of the Convention: the purposive and the evolutive interpretations. The chapter describes the approach of the Strasbourg Court to the interpretation of the ECHR and evaluates the influence of the Vienna Convention. It suggests that the interpretation of the Convention builds on the rules of public international law on the interpretation of treaties and has remained broadly consistent with those principles, and that the role of the Strasbourg Court is casuistic.


2007 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luzius Wildhaber

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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 863-885 ◽  
Author(s):  
ADAMANTIA RACHOVITSA

AbstractThis article discusses the contribution of the European Court of Human Rights to mitigating difficulties arising from the fragmentation of international law. It argues that the Court's case law provides insights and good practices to be followed. First, the article furnishes evidence that the Court has developed an autonomous and distinct interpretative principle to construe the European Convention on Human Rights by taking other norms of international law into account. Second, it offers a blueprint of the methodology that the Court employs when engaging with external norms in the interpretation process. It analyses the Court's approach to subtle contextual differences between similar or identical international norms and its position towards the requirements of Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT). It concludes that international courts are developing innovative interpretative practices, which may not be strictly based on the letter of the VCLT.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jörn Griebel

Property protection is provided by national law as well as international law. The study seeks for an explanation regarding the divergent approaches to the protection of shareholders in cases of reflective loss provided for in German constitutional law and various fields of public international law. This is done by way of a comparison of the German approach with those found in the law of aliens, in the European Convention on Human Rights and under international investment law. This results in the finding that approaches of international law partly fail to establish the necessary bonds to recognized concepts of national law.


2010 ◽  
Vol 79 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Rietiker

AbstractThe recent past has shown an ever-growing fragmentation of the international legal system where lawyers and judges are facing more and more the phenomenon of the same legal question being discussed in different fora. This is particularly the case in the field of human rights that entails the dispersal of responsibilities for interpretation of numerous instruments among various different judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, of both universal and regional nature. In order to secure coherence and legal certainty in the system, it is important to respect a set of principles and rules of general international law, in particular Articles 31–33 of the 1969 Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties (VCLT). The first goal of this article is to analyse whether the Court applies the rules of the VCLT to the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Secondly, assuming that the VCLT fully applies, it will be analysed whether Article 31(1) VCLT is flexible enough to allow nevertheless some leeway for the development of specificities, especially as a result of the particular nature of the ECHR. Thirdly, it will be shown that the Court has indeed developed a set of specific methods of interpretation, aiming to render the rights enshrined in the ECHR effective. From the author's point of view, they can all be regarded as sub-forms (or partial aspects) of the teleological interpretation. He distinguishes between four dimensions of the principle of "effectiveness".


2021 ◽  
Vol 195 ◽  
pp. 239-294

239State responsibility — Attribution — United Nations peacekeeping troops — Dutch battalion contingent of United Nations Protection Force in Bosnia and Herzegovina (“Dutchbat”) — Responsibility for conduct of Dutchbat — Acts of Dutchbat taking place up until 23.00 on 11 July 1995 under UN flag — Whether attributable to Netherlands — Whether Netherlands having effective control over acts — UN International Law Commission Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts 2001, Articles 4(1) and 8 — Dutchbat United Nations organ — Whether Dutchbat’s conduct taking place under direction or control of Netherlands — Effective control standard — Whether Netherlands responsible for Dutchbat’s conduct at relevant timeInternational organizations — Responsibility — United Nations — Peacekeeping troops — Dutchbat — Dutchbat United Nations organ — Responsibility for conduct of Dutchbat — Acts of Dutchbat taking place up until 23.00 on 11 July 1995 under UN flag — Ultra vires conduct — Attribution to UN — UN International Law Commission Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations 2011, Article 8Treaties — Interpretation — Application — Effect — Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948 — Article I — Obligation to prevent genocide — Interpretation of provision in accordance with Articles 31-3 of Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 — Text of Genocide Convention — Legislative history of Genocide Convention — Whether Contracting Parties intending obligation to have direct effect — Whether terms of provision sufficiently precise to be applied directly — Whether obligation having direct effect in proceedings between civilians and NetherlandsRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948 — Article I — Obligation to prevent genocide — Whether Article I of Genocide Convention having direct effect within meaning of Articles 93 and 94 of Constitution of the Netherlands — Interpretation of provision in accordance with Articles 31-3 of Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 — Text of Genocide Convention — Legislative history of Genocide Convention — Whether Contracting Parties intending obligation to have direct effect — Whether terms of provision sufficiently 240precise to be applied directly — Whether obligation having direct effect in proceedings between civilians and NetherlandsInternational criminal law — Genocide — Whether Netherlands failing to prevent genocide perpetrated by Bosnian Serbs — Obligation to prevent genocide in Article I of Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948 — Whether Netherlands violating Article I of Genocide Convention — Whether Article I having direct effect in proceedings between civilians and NetherlandsRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Articles 2 and 3 — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — Protection of rights to life and physical integrity — Whether Dutchbat’s acts wrongful to be assessed under Dutch law — Applicable standard — Article 6:162 of Dutch Civil Code — Duty of care — Standards derived from Articles 2 and 3 of European Convention inherent in duty of care — Whether Court of Appeal applying correct standardHuman rights — Rights to life and physical integrity — Treaties — Standards — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950, Articles 2 and 3 — War situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina — Evacuation of refugees — Rights of male refugees — Violation of rights by Bosnian Serbs — Whether Dutchbat’s command knew, or reasonably ought to have known, at time of evacuation of real risk of violation of those rights — Whether Dutchbat acting wrongfully — Whether wrongful for Dutchbat to continue to cooperate in evacuation of refugees located in safe area outside compound — Whether wrongful for Dutchbat not to offer male refugees the choice of remaining in compound — Whether real chance that male refugees could have escaped Bosnian Serbs if remaining in compound — Estimation of chanceDamages — Claim for damages — Whether Netherlands to pay compensation — Whether order of Court of Appeal for compensation to be paid — Whether based on incorrect interpretation of law — Whether incomprehensible — Whether claim for damages could only be lodged by surviving relatives of male refugees evacuated from compound on 13 July 1995 — Whether Mothers of Srebrenica Association could claim damages — The law of the Netherlands


Teisė ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 87 ◽  
pp. 69-85
Author(s):  
K. Bubnytė

Straipsnyje analizuojant Žmogaus teisių ir pagrindinių laisvių apsaugos konvencijos taikymą galutinės instancijos Lietuvos teismų (Lietuvos Aukščiausiojo Teismo ir Lietuvos vyriausiojo administracinio teis­mo) praktikoje, atskleidžiamas Konvencijos internalizavimo kokybinis aspektas. Aptariamos šiam pro­cesui turinčios įtakos normatyvinės ir bihevioristinės prielaidos, išskiriamos galimos Konvencijos taiky­mo formos ir būdai, kartu atskleidžiama Lietuvos teismų vaidmens Konvencijos įgyvendinimo procese nacionalinės ir tarptautinės teisės požiūriu reikšmė. The article deals with a qualitative aspect of the internalization of the European Convention on Human Rights through analysis of the application of the Convention in the case law of the Lithuanian courts of last resort (namely, the Lithuanian Supreme Court and Lithuanian Supreme Administrative Court). The factors – both normative and behaviouristic – influencing the process at issue are discussed, possible forms and modes of the application of the Convention are distinguished, simultaneously, the significance of the role of Lithuanian courts in the process of the implementation of the Convention is disclosed from both perspectives – that of national and international law.


2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 271-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eirik Bjorge

The technique of ‘evolutive interpretation’ is well known in public international law.2It is particularly associated with treaty regimes like that of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).3The currency of this technique of interpretation has, however, been less evident ingeneralpublic international law. It is not insignificant therefore that the International Court of Justice (ICJ), in a case about navigational and related rights has now made unambiguously clear that, where the parties have used generic terms in a treaty, aware that the meaning of the terms was likely to evolve over time, and where the treaty is one of continuing duration, the parties as a general rule must be presumed to have intended those terms to have an ‘evolving meaning’.4


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document