10. Terrorism

Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter focuses on terrorism as a contested concept and the controversy surrounding its definition, along with the debate about the relationship between anti-terror law and human rights. It looks at the issue of compatibility between anti-terror law and human rights in the context of the rule of law and proportionality. The chapter also examines the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) interpretation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as well as the conditions under which states can derogate from the ECHR. Finally, it considers anti-terror law in the UK and the challenges it has faced in the courts.

Author(s):  
Egidijus Küris

Western legal tradition gave the birth to the concept of the rule of law. Legal theory and constitutional justice significantly contributed to the crystallisation of its standards and to moving into the direction of the common concept of the rule of law. The European Court of Human Rights uses this concept as an interpretative tool, the extension of which is the quality of the law doctrine, which encompasses concrete requirements for the law under examination in this Court, such as prospectivity of law, its foreseeability, clarity etc. The author of the article, former judge of the Lithuanian Constitutional Court and currently the judge of the European Court of Human Rights, examines how the latter court has gradually intensified (not always consistently) its reliance on the rule of law as a general principle, inherent in all the Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, to the extent that in some of its judgments it concentrates not anymore on the factual situation of an individual applicant, but, first and foremost, on the examination of the quality of the law. The trend is that, having found the quality of the applicable law to be insufficient, the Court considers that the mere existence of contested legislation amounts to an unjustifiable interference into a respective right and finds a violation of respective provisions of the Convention. This is an indication of the Court’s progressing self-approximation to constitutional courts, which are called to exercise abstract norm-control.La tradición occidental alumbró la noción del Estado de Derecho. La teoría del Derecho y la Justicia Constitucional han contribuido decisivamente a la cristalización de sus estándares, ayudando a conformar un acervo común en torno al mismo. El Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos emplea la noción de Estado de Derecho como una herramienta interpretativa, fundamentalmente centrada en la doctrina de la calidad de la ley, que implica requisitos concretos que exige el Tribunal tales como la claridad, la previsibilidad, y la certeza en la redacción y aplicación de la norma. El autor, en la actualidad Juez del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos y anterior Magistrado del Tribunal Constitucional de Lituania, examina cómo el primero ha intensificado gradualmente (no siempre de forma igual de consistente) su confianza en el Estado de Derecho como principio general, inherente a todos los preceptos que forman el Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos, hasta el punto de que en algunas de sus resoluciones se concentra no tanto en la situación de hecho del demandante individual sino, sobre todo y ante todo, en el examen de esa calidad de la ley. La tendencia del Tribunal es a considerar que, si observa que la ley no goza de calidad suficiente, la mera existencia de la legislación discutida supone una interferencia injustificable dentro del derecho en cuestión y declara la violación del precepto correspondiente del Convenio. Esto implica el acercamiento progresivo del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos a los Tribunales Constitucionales, quienes tienen encargado el control en abstracto de la norma legal.


Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter focuses on freedom of religion and freedom of expression, which are classified as qualified rights, and examines Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which explains the right to hold or not hold a belief as well as the right to manifest a belief. It also considers how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) decides if there has been manifestation of belief, interpretation of Article 10 with respect to views that shock and disturb and some forms of hate speech, and state restriction of expression. The chapter concludes with a discussion of freedom of religion and expression in the UK.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 33-51
Author(s):  
Agno Andrijauskaito

The principle of legality permeates the entire legal system based on the rule of law. It is especially well-pronounced in criminal law. However, what are its content, scope and implications when it comes to prescribing and punishing for offences which are supposedly less reprehensible, namely – administrative offences? How precisely should they or the sanctions that they stipulate be defined in legal provisions? Furthermore, is there any room for interpretation while imposing sanctions by public bodies? This article seeks to delve into these vexed questions by examining the relationship between the principle of legality and administrative punishment within the framework of the Council of Europe ('CoE') and the implications stemming therefrom. This will be done by dissecting the rationale and notion of this principle in the normative sources of the CoE with a special emphasis on Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights and its (autonomous) application in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights as well as by identifying the shortcomings of the current perception of the legality principle in the context of administrative punishment.


2021 ◽  
pp. 130-146
Author(s):  
Howard Davis

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, discussion points and thinking points help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress and knowledge can be tested by self-test questions and exam questions at the chapter end. This chapter discusses the various concepts that pervade the way the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is interpreted and, therefore, how Convention rights under the HRA are applied. The chapter considers the internal and external sources used to interpret the text. It goes on to consider the concepts that the European Court of Human Rights has developed when applying the Convention. In particular the ‘living instrument’ doctrine, the idea of the rule of law, the margin of appreciation, proportionality, and democracy (in a Convention context) are considered and explored.


Author(s):  
Wickremasinghe Chanaka

Entico v UNESCO provides the most detailed examination to date by a court in the UK of the relationship between the immunity of an international organization, UNESCO, and the right of access to a court, as it is implied in the interpretation of art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It raises an interesting question about the applicability of the much-cited judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in Waite and Kennedy in the context of a UN Specialised Agency. The case teaches us that the huge variety of international organizations means that the extent of their immunities must be fashioned in the case of each organization to meet their particular functional needs. This suggests that the national court needs to approach generalizations with care, and a full appreciation of the international legal context that governs the organization in question.


2021 ◽  
pp. 198-218
Author(s):  
European Law

This chapter examines appeals and other types of recourse, including extraordinary motion for review. The ability to appeal from or otherwise challenge judgments is a well-established feature amongst procedural systems, albeit it is, in principle, not recognised by the European Court of Human Rights as falling within the ambit of the right to fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The present European Rules of Civil Procedure adopt the approach that there is a right to appeal, albeit one that may only be exercised with the permission of the appellate court according to special provisions with respect to access and scope. In this way the appellate process, and the right to appeal, provides an effective balance between the principles of finality in litigation, accuracy in decision-making, expedition, and proportionality. Principle 27 of the ALI/UNIDROIT Principles addresses the necessity of keeping the right balance between diverging aspects of the rule of law as follows: ‘(2) The scope of appellate review should ordinarily be limited to claims and defenses addressed in first-instance proceeding. (3) The appellate court may in the interest of justice consider new facts and evidence’.


Author(s):  
Andrew Yu. KLYUCHNIKOV

The article is devoted to the principle of the rule of law, implemented through the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950. (Convention) by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The relevance of studying this principle is due to the new approach formed by the Court that the rule of law is “inherent in all articles of the Convention.” We can see its application in the current case-law of the Court as one of the fundamental elements of the independence of national courts. Thus, the author aims to identify the theoretical and practical aspects of the ECHR’s approach to the problem of judicial independence and legal application of the rule of law principle, to study the relevant Court practice. The rule of law and the independence of the judiciary as the basic elements of the convention system are an integral part of the institution of the “European public order” developed by the ECHR, therefore it is necessary to trace their interconnection. The case-law of the ECHR served as the material for the study, which allowed us to identify all stages of the formation of the rule of law principle and its actual “content”. Analyzing judicial practice, along with using doctrinal approaches, we managed to identify the limits of permissible application of national laws, the powers of bodies and officials of various branches of government, bodies of the judicial community to the given problem, new aspects of the status of judges seen as one of the democratic values of society. To achieve this, the author used methods specific to studies of law and general scientific (traditional) research methods, with an emphasis on comparative and general legal methods, and the method of induction during the analysis of judicial practice. The paper examines the normative sources of law and judicial practice of the ECHR, allowing to reveal the principle of the rule of law, its correlation with the principle of judicial independence, the specifics of its impact on the domestic national judicial system and the functioning of the state apparatus, to determine the role of the principle in the convention mechanism of the protection of human rights.


Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter focuses on freedom from discrimination, beginning with an overview of equality as a contested concept as well as formal and substantive forms of equality, and then examines the United Nations’ development of specific treaty and charter mechanisms to protect individuals against discrimination. It then discusses Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which gives limited protection against discrimination but has been expanded by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in its case law and via Protocol 12. Finally, the chapter examines the consolidation and expansion of equality laws in the UK (except for Northern Ireland) under the Equality Act 2010.


Author(s):  
Ханлар Гаджиев ◽  
Khanlar Gadzhiev

The article discusses the problem of interpretation of the provisions of the European Convention on human rights by European Court of Human Rights, as well as the development of dialogue between judges of different levels, aimed at the formation of the European “common” law. Placing at the forefront the principle of the rule of law as the basis for all the guarantees of human rights, the author substantiates the necessity of the interaction of various levels courts, based on mutual respect, dialogue of the courts, what will undoubtedly lead to the enrichment of the legal system, searching for the most complete and effective regulation of social relations. According to the author, the effectiveness of interaction between courts is based primarily on a shared understanding of the importance of the activities of ECtHR judges in the development of common approaches to the protection of human rights and consolidation of the efforts in search of forming a common legal space. Using the example of some cases considered by the ECtHR, the article illustrated the options of interaction of the Court with national courts. The article reveals some problematic issues in the activity of the ECtHR, in particular the lack of involvement the principle of harmonious interpretation.


2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 335-361
Author(s):  
BJÖRNSTJERN BAADE

AbstractThis article argues that understanding the role of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or the Court) to be that of a guardian of discourse would respect legitimate disagreement among pluralist democracies, while enabling the Court to safeguard human rights in a meaningful and effective way.From the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR or the Convention) and the Court's jurisprudence, three basic standards of review can be distilled: First, wherever the Convention's requirements are sufficiently concrete, the Court holds contracting states to well-established standards. Second, when applying broad, abstract and relative Convention rights, the Court safeguards the practical rationality of a democratic decision-making discourse under the rule of law – a substantive review standard that is influenced by procedural factors. Third, the Court also needs to check the facts underlying the case, in order to render its control effective.By setting ‘soft’ precedent in the form of factors that guide future decision-making without entirely prejudging it, and by taking into account second-order reasons concerning its legitimacy to intervene, the Court is acting as a second player in states’ decision-making discourse. Its task is not to replace the institutions originally responsible for taking the decision, but to ensure that they conform to their own role.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document