Suchergebnisse

To play a cooperative and constructive role in the Convention system, national courts must be able and willing to do so. Ability to cooperate is certainly an important issue, involving language problems and other questions of access to information. It is my conviction that the long-term viability and strength of the Convention system depend on a division of labor based on dialogue and procedural as well as substantive subsidiarity, and I would like to draw attention to the way dialogue between the courts in th4e exercise of their respective jurisdictions and the principle of subsidiarity are interconnected. Adapted from the source document.

Article 56 of the European Convention on Human Rights is often referred to as the «colonial clause» and it has received little attention by commentators, whereas there has been extensive writing on Article 1of the Convention regarding the extraterritorial reach of that treaty. Article 56 has nevertheless the effect of limiting the responsibility of Member States for acts and omissions of the authorities of its dependent territories, although the Member State is still responsible if it acts directly through its own metropolitan officials in such territories. By employing an example of Norway, this paper finds it unnecessary for this country to undertake obligations pursuant to Article 56 in relation to its dependent territories in and around Antarctica, since there is currently little activity there which is not already covered by the extraterritorial regime of Article 1 of the Convention. The paper additionally considers the pros and cons of extending the Convention to territories under Article 56 should future devel- opments lead to a larger and more permanent population of these areas.Keywords: European Convention on Human Rights, extraterritoriality, dependencies, South Atlantic, AntarcticaCitation: Arctic Review on Law and Politics, vol. 4, 1/2013 pp. 21–41. ISSN 1891-6252

The article discusses the accession of the European Union (EU) to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and this from a global law perspective. At the outset, the article offers a background on the path to making the European Union a more complete human-rights organization and on its interrelations with the ECHR system. The article pays attention to the potential rivalry between the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the ECHR and examines the key features of the European human rights law space, shedding light on the relationship between the European Union's and Council of Europe's human rights regime, and between the Luxembourg and Strasbourg Court. The article then discusses the main features of the recently adopted Draft Accession Treaty (DAT). Last, the article examines the outcomes of the accession of the European Union into ECHR—from both a domestic and international law perspective—and concludes with some overall remarks. The article concludes that the accession provides for a significant legal development for the EU itself, its international liability context, and the overall growing, multi-level, and integrated European human rights system.

The post Positive Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights: Within and Beyond Boundaries appeared first on Völkerrechtsblog.

This article examines recently enacted legislation in the Russian Federation designed to regulate so-called 'homosexual propaganda.' Through an analysis of the extant jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (Eur. Ct. H.R.) in respect of discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation, the article considers the extent to which the existence and enforcement of 'homosexual propaganda' laws can be said to violate rights and freedoms guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The article demonstrates weaknesses in current Eur. Ct. H.R.'s jurisprudence – specifically in relation to Arts. 10, 11 and 14 of the ECHR – and argues that it requires significant evolution to better protect sexual minorities in Russia and elsewhere.

In paragraph 1 of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the imposition of the death penalty is permitted, as a departure from the right to life. In the last decades there has been a tendency for the absolute abolition of the death penalty, in times of war and peace. As a result of this effort, almost all European countries abolished the death penalty. In addition, the Council of Europe adopted Protocol 6 and Protocol 13, which completely abolished the death penalty. The European Court also, in its practice, using the principle of "convention as a living instrument", has changed its approach to the scope of the ban on the application of the death penalty. The authors deal with a critical interpretation of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, trying to answer the question, of whether there has been an abrogation of the provision of paragraph 1 of Article 2, so that according to that provision, there is an absolute ban on the application of the death penalty in the Council of Europe member states.