A Traffic-Light System of State Arguments before the European Court of Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-217
Author(s):  
Conall Mallory
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The Other ◽  
Traffic Light ◽  
Light System ◽  
European Court ◽  
Implicit System ◽  
Interpretive Communities ◽  
Determining Factor

Abstract Despite an often-tense relationship between Contracting Parties and those who administer the echr, the atmosphere within the Court remains relatively peaceful. I suggest that this harmony is the result of a traffic-light system of state arguments: ‘green’ for acceptable orthodox arguments, ‘amber’ for more dubious submissions, and ‘red’ for contentions that exceed the parameters of appropriate conduct. Using Stanley Fish’s theory of interpretive communities, I contend that the determining factor behind the acceptability of an argument is the reaction that it receives from the other stakeholders within the Convention system. The harmony is therefore the product of an implicit system of internal regulation. While this stability is to be celebrated, given the present global backlash against human rights, and ‘Strasbourg bashing’ more specifically, it is not to be taken for granted.

The Internationalization Of Human Rights And The Importance Of Normative Dialogues Between International And National Courts

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 137
Author(s):  
Mariane Morato Stival ◽  
Marcos André Ribeiro ◽  
Daniel Gonçalves Mendes da Costa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Differences Of Opinion ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Different Characteristics ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

This article intends to analyze in the context of the complexity of the process of internationalization of human rights, the definitions and tensions between cultural universalism and relativism, the essence of human rights discourse, its basic norms and an analysis of the normative dialogues in case decisions involving violations of human rights in international tribunals such as the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and national courts. The well-established dialogue between courts can bring convergences closer together and remove differences of opinion on human rights protection. A new dynamic can occur through a complementarity of one court with respect to the other, even with the different characteristics between the legal orders.

To Discriminate in Order to Fight Discrimination

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dolores Morondo Taramundi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
The Other ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Main Technique ◽  
Antidiscrimination Law ◽  
The One ◽  
Paradoxical Results ◽  
Conflicts Of Rights

This chapter analyses arguments regarding conflicts of rights in the field of antidiscrimination law, which is a troublesome and less studied area of the growing literature on conflicts of rights. Through discussion of Ladele and McFarlane v. The United Kingdom, a case before the European Court of Human Rights, the chapter examines how the construction of this kind of controversy in terms of ‘competing rights’ or ‘conflicts of rights’ seems to produce paradoxical results. Assessment of these apparent difficulties leads the discussion in two different directions. On the one hand, some troubles come to light regarding the use of the conflict of rights frame itself in the field of antidiscrimination law, particularly in relation to the main technique (‘balancing of rights’) to solve them. On the other hand, some serious consequences of the conflict of rights frame on the development of the antidiscrimination theory of the ECtHR are unearthed.

The Continuation of Politics, by Other Means: Judicial Dialogue under the Human Rights Act 1998

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. R. G. Murray
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Government Policy ◽  
The Other ◽  
Political Debate ◽  
Pressure Groups ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Uk Government ◽  
Do So

Much of the judicial-dialogue debate implies that this process was initiated by the Human Rights Act, but developments since its enactment arguably refine the long-established process whereby the courts interact with the other branches of government. For example, when individuals (often supported by pressure groups) pursue rights-based claims they may do so not with the expectation that the courts will uphold their claim, but in the hope that judges will issue a declaration of incompatibility with which they can influence political debate. The Human Rights Act marks an increase in the volume (in both senses of the word) of such dialogue. Judges must now consider their decisions not only regarding their impact upon UK government policy but also with one eye towards ensuring that the European Court of Human Rights upholds their decisions. This chapter examines these efforts, focusing in particular on the growth in ‘protest cases’ before the courts.

Physical Education and Religious Freedom

2019 ◽  
pp. 144-155
Author(s):  
Konstantinos Margaritis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Physical Education ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Democratic Society ◽  
The Other ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
European Court

Freedom of religion has been constantly characterized as one of the foundations of a democratic society. On the other hand, the significance of physical education in the development of children's overall personality is beyond dispute. Thus, the question that arises is, What happens in a case of a conflict involving the above? The aim of this chapter is to provide an answer on the basis of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. In particular, the fundamental cases of Dogru vs. France and Kervanci vs. France will be examined, as well as the recent case of Osmanoglu and Kocabas vs. Switzerland. Through the analysis of the cases, useful conclusions will be drawn on the possible impact of religious freedom on physical education.

Separation of Powers and Alternative Dispute Resolution before the European Court of Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-271
Author(s):  
Cedric Jenart ◽  
Mathieu Leloup
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
International Level ◽  
European Court

Alternative dispute resolution procedures before the European Court of Human Rights – The state agent, a member of the executive branch, tasked with representing the respondent state – Judicial and legislative branches of the respondent state limited or bound by concessions by the state agent – Convention framework effectively increases the power of the executive branch to the detriment of the other branches of government in the respondent state – Tension with national separation of powers – Possible solutions on a national and international level

Slaughterhouse-Six: Updating the Law of War

2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 525-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ed Morgan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
European Court ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Time Zones ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
State Obligations ◽  
The Impact

International law has come unstuck in time. It has gone to sleep stressing a normative future based on state “obligations owed towards all the other members of the international community,” and has awakened in a bygone world in which the state is “susceptible of no limitation not imposed by itself.” The opposing time zones seem now to exist in unison. Thus, for example, the European Court of Human Rights, in examining the impact of the Torture Convention, can split 9:8 on whether national self-interest trumps universal rules of cooperation, or the other way around. Likewise, England's House of Lords can opine in thePinochetcase that, as between a reinvigorated national jurisdiction and the developing concept of universal one, “international law is on the move.”

The Reception Process in Austria and Switzerland

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniela Thurnherr
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Starting Position ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Common

This chapter discusses the reception of the ECHR in Austria and Switzerland. Topics covered include the accession and ratification of the ECHR in both countries, the status of the ECHR in national law, an overview of the activity of the European Court of Human Rights, and the ECtHR's case law and its effects on the national legal order. Although both countries joined the ECHR at a relatively early stage, this starting position led to different outcomes. The main reason is because the common denominators of neutrality and federalism in these two countries are actually rather small: as Austria follows a very different concept of neutrality, it did not face any (political) difficulties before and during the ratification process. Switzerland, on the other hand, was very reluctant to join the Council of Europe and careful to avoid any concessions with regard to neutrality.

scholarly journals De lo subjetivo a lo objetivo en la jurisprudencia convencional, en dos ejemplos

2019 ◽  
pp. 513
Author(s):  
Antonio López Castillo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Space ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
European Court ◽  
Living Together

En la reciente jurisprudencia del TEDH se advierte una cierta modulación, de lo subjetivo a lo objetivo, en un contexto de controvertida reconsideración nacional de las sociedades abiertas de la Europa en crisis. De ello se trata aquí atendiendo a dos manifestaciones de conflictos de diverso porte y alcance; a propósito, la una, del inclusivo ámbito de la enseñanza, y relativa, la otra, a la regulación de acceso al espacio público mediante reglas excluyentes, de prevención general, pretendidamente instrumentales al aseguramiento de la salvaguarda de la convivencia, de la vida en común.The recent case law of the European Court of Human Rights shows a certain modulation, from the subjective to the objective, in a context of controversial national reconsideration of the open societies of Europe in crisis. This is what we are dealing with here in the light of two manifestations of conflicts of different sizes and scope; purposefully, one, of the inclusive field of education, and relative, the other, to the regulation of access to public space by means of excluding rules, of general prevention, supposedly instrumental to ensuring the safeguarding of coexistence, of living together.

Unilateral Diplomatic Assurances as an Alternative to Provisional Measures

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 445-471 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Thomas Worster
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The Other ◽  
Legal Obligation ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Dual Nature ◽  
Usual Approach ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court

During litigation on the international plane, states sometimes will issue assurances either to the other litigant or to the international court directly. This article explores how those assurances interact with applications for provisional measures. The practice of courts varies with regard to how to react to these assurances, though the usual approach is that assurances issued to another state or individual are generally non-binding, while assurances issued to the court directly are binding. At the same time, litigants can apply to the court for provisional measures to prevent actions that would disturb the dispute. When the assurances are considered non-binding, they are treated as questions of fact and can be assessed for credibility and reliability, as a part of the provisional measures analysis. But when the assurances are considered binding, they are treated as questions of law, and the undertaken legal obligation disposes of the request for a provisional measures order. This article will examine the practices of the International Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights on this issue, identifying where their practices diverge and converge, and recommending that the dual nature of assurances, as both factual and legal, be considered in assessing their value.

The ‘Iukos Affair’. The Russian Judiciary and the European Court of Human Rights

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurence A. Groen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The Other ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Undue Influence ◽  
European Court ◽  
Russian State ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Structural Nature ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights

This note analyzes the functioning of the Russian judiciary on the basis of the European Court of Human Rights’ judgments in the cases of OAO Neftianaia Kompaniia Iukos and three of the company’s former leading executives, Mikhail Borisovich Khodorkovskii, Platon Leonidovich Lebedev and the late Vasilii Aleksanian. The analysis turns to the breaches by the Russian state of Articles 5 (right to liberty and security), 6 (right to a fair trial) and 18 (permissible restrictions to the rights guaranteed) of the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as established by the Court in the aforementioned cases, and the role of the Russian judiciary therein. In light of the fundamental flaws and structural nature characterizing the violations found, the conclusion is reached that the Russian judiciary (still) appears not to be entirely free from undue influence by the other branches of government.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document