scholarly journals The European Court of Human Rights Decision on the ´Burqa Ban´ and the critical analysis of the Pragmatic experimental logic

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Flavianne Fernanda Bitencourt Nóbrega ◽  
George Browne Rego
2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 1786-1812 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Tickell

Over the last decade, the admissibility decision-making of the European Court of Human Rights has been the focus of considerable attention in the analysis of the “mounting pressure on the Convention system,” but has enjoyed little critical analysis in legal, sociological or socio-legal literatures. This paper will argue that this combination of intense attention and critical neglect is paradoxical, and has produced fascinating and hitherto largely unnoticed discontinuities and incompatibilities between the rhetorical representation of the Court's admissibility decision-making in ongoing Convention reform debates and the published jurisprudence of the Court on those standards of admissibility.


2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Burbano Herrera

A Critical Analysis Of The Work Of The European Commission And European Court Of Human Rights In Relation With Non-Compliance Of Interim Measures - Period 1957-2011


2021 ◽  
Vol 3(164) ◽  
pp. 243-260
Author(s):  
Jacek Falski

The article provides a critical analysis of three individual notification opinions issued by the UN Human Rights Committee in July 2018 on the compatibility of existing regulations in States parties (France, Turkey) on bans on wearing religious symbols with the freedom to manifest religion guaranteed by Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Moreover, the text points out the dichotomy – in terms of content – of positions on this issue between the universal body and the regional reference body (the European Court of Human Rights) and also addresses such systemic issues as the problem of legal force of the Committee’s opinions, the lack of dialogue or even isolationism of international bodies ruling on human rights, or the dispute over the primacy of their decisions.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christos Giannopoulos

Abstract This article focuses on two subjects: the attitude of national courts towards the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and their role in the achievement of effective domestic implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights. The first topic outlines a typology of the positions adopted, which is proposed in order to underline the national strategies regarding the reception of the res interpretata effect of the Court’s judgments. The second provides a critical analysis of the mirror metaphor, which is proposed to resolve some unproven and untested assumptions that domestic courts act as puppets and cannot go beyond Convention standards without violating the Court’s authentic interpretations. In both cases, examples are given of domestic courts’ practices in order to clarify that the judicial interaction between domestic courts and the European Court of Human Rights is not always harmonious.


Author(s):  
Ángeles Solanes Corella

Resumen: Las expulsiones colectivas de extranjeros, aun estando prohibidas por el derecho internacional, son una práctica que sistemáticamente se ha aplicado en el ámbito del control de los flujos migratorios. En el caso de España, en su frontera sur terrestre, se han generalizado las denominadas “devoluciones en caliente”. Las vulneraciones de derechos que conllevan estas medidas son incompatibles con el Convenio Europeo para la Protección de los Derechos Humanos y de las Libertades Fundamentales, del que derivan obligaciones concretas para los Estados parte. Este trabajo, propone un análisis crítico de la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos para delimitar cuándo se produce una expulsión colectiva. Con ello se pretende evitar la aparente normalización de una medida que es ilegal e insistir en los mecanismos garantistas de los derechos de los extranjeros. Abstract: The collective expulsion of foreigners, although prohibited by International Law, is a practice that has been systematically applied in the field of control of migration flows. In the case of Spain, on its southern land border, the so-called police "push-backs" have become widespread. The violations of rights entailed by these measures are incompatible with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, from which obligations derive for the States Parties. This paper proposes a critical analysis of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights to delimit when a collective expulsion occurs. This is intended to avoid the apparent normalization of a measure that is illegal and to insist on mechanisms that guarantee the rights of foreigners.


2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niraj Nathwani

This article will first present two cases at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR): Dahlab vs Switzerland and Leyla Sahin vs Turkey and then comment on these two decisions focusing on the following issues: State neutrality; negative freedom of religion; right to education; gender discrimination; discriminatory statements; religious discrimination; political extremism. This article will argue that the reasoning of the ECtHR in the cases Dahlab vs Switzerland and Leyla Sahin v Turkey is questionable and at odds with important principles developed in the established case law of the Court.


Author(s):  
Ian Leigh

This chapter develops a test (the ‘reversibility test’) for resolving clashing rights cases where limitations of Convention rights for the protection of the ‘rights and freedoms of others’ are at stake. It demonstrates how the reversibility test operates in the context of the conflict between religious autonomy and the right to respect for private and family life under Articles 9 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and why it is preferable to either definitional or ad hoc balancing between these rights. A critical analysis of the European Court of Human Rights’ Grand Chamber decision in Fernández Martinez v. Spain substantiates the utility and strengths of the test and shows how it vindicates the reasoning in the Court’s minority judgment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document