Beyond Expansion or Restriction? Models of Interaction between the Living Instrument and Margin of Appreciation Doctrines and the Scope of the echr

Q3 Social Sciences International Human Rights Law Review Pub Date : 2021-06-23 DOI:10.1163/22131035-01001004
Rachael Ita, D. Hicks
{"title":"Beyond Expansion or Restriction? Models of Interaction between the Living Instrument and Margin of Appreciation Doctrines and the Scope of the echr","authors":"Rachael Ita, D. Hicks","doi":"10.1163/22131035-01001004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe living instrument doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is criticised as restricting the margin of appreciation of States and expanding the scope of the European Convention on Human Rights (echr). Systematic examination of this claim is usually overlooked in the context of the relationship between the admissibility and merits phase of ECtHR cases. This article considers this claim in the context of jurisdictional arguments on incompatibility ratione materiae (subject matter outside the scope of the Convention) and the link to the merits of the case. Case law of the ECtHR from January 1979 to December 2016 is assessed to elaborate four models of interaction between the margin of appreciation and living instrument doctrines. The article argues the need to go beyond consideration of expansion and restriction of the scope of the echr, and to assess the Court’s appetite for allocating new duties to States based upon the case arguments and positioning of living instrument and margin of appreciation doctrines.","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Human Rights Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-01001004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The living instrument doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is criticised as restricting the margin of appreciation of States and expanding the scope of the European Convention on Human Rights (echr). Systematic examination of this claim is usually overlooked in the context of the relationship between the admissibility and merits phase of ECtHR cases. This article considers this claim in the context of jurisdictional arguments on incompatibility ratione materiae (subject matter outside the scope of the Convention) and the link to the merits of the case. Case law of the ECtHR from January 1979 to December 2016 is assessed to elaborate four models of interaction between the margin of appreciation and living instrument doctrines. The article argues the need to go beyond consideration of expansion and restriction of the scope of the echr, and to assess the Court’s appetite for allocating new duties to States based upon the case arguments and positioning of living instrument and margin of appreciation doctrines.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超越扩张还是限制?生活工具与欣赏边际的互动模式
欧洲人权法院的现行文书原则被批评为限制了各国的升值幅度,扩大了《欧洲人权公约》的范围。在ECtHR案件的受理和案情阶段之间的关系中,对这一主张的系统审查通常被忽视。本条是在就属事理由(《公约》范围外的主题)的不相容性以及与案情的联系进行管辖权辩论的背景下审议这一主张的。对1979年1月至2016年12月的ECtHR案例法进行了评估,以阐述升值幅度与现行工具理论之间的四种相互作用模式。该条认为,有必要超越对扩大和限制echr范围的考虑,并根据案件论点以及现行文书和升值幅度理论的定位,评估法院是否愿意将新的职责分配给各国。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The International Human Rights Law Review (HRLR) is a bi-annual peer-reviewed journal. It aims to stimulate research and thinking on contemporary human rights issues, problems, challenges and policies. It is particularly interested in soliciting papers, whether in the legal domain or other social sciences, that are unique in their approach and which seek to address poignant concerns of our times. One of the principal aims of the Journal is to provide an outlet to human rights scholars, practitioners and activists in the developing world who have something tangible to say about their experiences on the ground, or in order to discuss cases and practices that are generally inaccessible to European and NorthAmerican audiences. The Editors and the publisher will work hands-on with such contributors to help find solutions where necessary to facilitate translation or language editing in respect of accepted articles. The Journal is aimed at academics, students, government officials, human rights practitioners, and lawyers working in the area, as well as individuals and organisations interested in the area of human rights law. The Journal publishes critical articles that consider human rights law, policy and practice in their various contexts, at global, regional, sub-regional and national levels, book reviews, and a section focused on an up-to-date appraisal of important jurisprudence and practice of the UN and regional human rights systems including those in the developing world.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Note Inter-States Disputes Under the Inter-American Human Rights System Inter-State Cases under icerd as an Avenue to Protect Cultural Heritage The Path Less Taken? Interstate Conciliation and Human Rights General comment No. 26 (2023) on Children’s Rights and the Environment, with a Special Focus on Climate Change
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1