European Court of Human Rights: rules of court
In: International legal materials: current documents, Band 38, Heft 1, S. 208-246
ISSN: 0020-7829
321560 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: International legal materials: current documents, Band 38, Heft 1, S. 208-246
ISSN: 0020-7829
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 60, Heft 1, S. 189-208
ISSN: 1471-6895
Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute)1provides that the International Criminal Court must consider 'internationally recognized human rights' in its interpretation and application of applicable law. This article highlights the difficulty of meaningfully interpreting this reference to 'internationally recognized human rights' in accordance with the ordinary rules of treaty interpretation. These interpretative difficulties lead the article to adopt a practical focus, examining the initial jurisprudence of the Court utilizing this aspect of article 21(3), concluding that although such jurisprudence reveals a number of shortcomings, the provision's tremendous potential as a tool of evolution and innovation is evident.
In: Studies of the Max Planck Institute Luxembourg for International, European and Regulatory Procedural Law, volume 2
This volume deals with the domestic effects of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights as a challenge to the various levels of legal orders in Europe. The starting point is the divergent impact of the ECtHR's jurisdiction within the Convention States. The volume seeks new methods of orientation at the various legal levels, given the fact that the Strasbourg case law is increasingly important for most areas of society. Topical tendencies in the case law of the Court are highlighted and discussed against the background of the principle of subsidiarity. The book includes a detailed analy.
In: Northeastern University School of Law Research Paper No. 290-2017
SSRN
In: Human rights quarterly: a comparative and international journal of the social sciences, humanities, and law, Band 35, Heft 1, S. 176-200
ISSN: 0275-0392
In: Human rights review: HRR, Band 13, Heft 3, S. 279-301
ISSN: 1874-6306
In: International studies in human rights volume 129
In: Human Rights and Humanitarian Law E-Books Online, Collection 2019, ISBN: 9789004390775
Front Matter -- -- -- Foreword -- Abbreviations -- Introduction -- Theoretical Framework: Consensus, Sectorialization and Subsidiarity -- The Notion of Consensus in Public International Law -- The Challenges Arising from the Specialization and Sectoralization of Public International Law -- Subsidiarity as a General Principle in International Human Rights Law -- Consensus and Evolutive Interpretation -- Evolutive Interpretation as a Method of Interpretation in Public International Law -- The Evolution of Regional Human Rights Treaties through the Notion of Consensus -- Consensus and the National Margin of Appreciation -- Scope of the National Margin of Appreciation -- Intrinsic Circumstances Conditioning the National Margin of Appreciation -- Consensus as an Extrinsic Circumstance Conditioning the National Margin of Appreciation -- Final Considerations -- Back Matter -- Bibliography -- Table of Jurisprudence and Case Law -- Table of International Treaties -- Table of Authors.
Negotiating sovereignty and human rights takes the transatlantic conflict over the International Criminal Court as a lens for an enquiry into the normative foundations of international society. The author shows how the way in which actors refer to core norms of the international society such as sovereignty and human rights affect the process and outcome of international negotiations. The book offers an innovative take on the long-standing debate over sovereignty and human rights in international relations. It goes beyond the simple and sometimes ideological duality of sovereignty versus human r
In: Elgar studies in human rights
Conversations about the involvement of States in the workings of the International Criminal Court often focus on the role of State cooperation in enabling the ICC to carry out criminal trials. However, there is a dimension to this cooperation that is underexplored. Whenever the ICC relies on the assistance of States, or States otherwise become involved in its functioning, the human rights of accused and witnesses involved in proceedings may be adversely affected. The simultaneous involvement of the ICC, ICC States Parties, and the ICC host State - whilst essential and unavoidable - can insert ambiguity and uncertainty into the protection of individuals, leaving the door open for human rights violations. This book explores this phenomenon of multi-actor human rights protection at the ICC. By setting out the relevant obligations of the different actors, the book highlights potential problems in human rights protection and proposes ways to mitigate them.
In: The Defence in International Criminal Trials, S. 72-92
Draghici contends that the advent of assisted reproductive technologies has given rise to new fundamental, albeit not unqualified, rights. They include the right to use medically assisted procreation (e.g. artificial insemination, in vitro fertilisation, potentially gamete donation, posthumous conception or surrogacy) in order to become a parent (typically where natural procreation is hindered by infertility, sexual orientation, relationship status or adverse life events), the recognition of intention-based parenthood in relation to donor-conceived children jointly planned and raised with the genetic parent, and the right to pursue the conception of a healthy child (e.g. through recourse to preimplantation genetic diagnosis and embryo selection to avoid severe illness in future offspring). To substantiate this claim, the book relies on a comprehensive analysis of international case-law on procreative autonomy, contextualised by a discussion of highly divisive bioethical controversies, from the status of embryos to the morality of genetic screening and third-party reproduction.
In: Northeastern University School of Law Research Paper No. 177-2014
SSRN
Working paper
"Has the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or Court) lost its legitimacy? The answer to this question is perhaps 'no'. If this was the case, the Contracting Parties would stop executing judgments of the Court; the applicants would stop bringing their complaints to the Court; and, finally, the Contracting Parties would denounce the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR or Convention). Another option might be that the ECtHR would continue to exist without having any real impact on human rights standards in Europe and its judgments would lose much of their value. This has not yet happened. International tribunals, including the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), face a substantial structural deficiency; they operate within systems that lack the coercive capacity to enforce their judgments. International courts thus depend, to a greater degree than domestic courts, on the legitimacy of their judgments as a basis upon which to encourage, and in effect coerce, compliance"--