{"title":"事后反思的历史:欧洲人权法院判例法第18条的(重新)发现","authors":"B. Çalı, Kristina Hatas","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3677678","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter investigates whether the recent heightened focus on Article 18, prohibiting restriction of rights for purposes not provided for in the Convention, in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights is a return to the origins of the Convention, which identified Article 18 as ringing ‘alarm bells’ against the subtle progression of totalitarianism in Europe. We examine the development of the Article 18 case law of the Court by reviewing all publicly available cases that have pleaded Article 18 before the former Commission and the ECtHR up until 2019. In light of this review, we find that the recent developments in the case law under Article 18 cannot be understood as returning to the origins of the Convention. It is a new development all together. We identify two reasons for the rediscovery of Article 18: the impetus to interpret the Convention progressively since its early days and the division amongst the bench of the Court as to how to interpret the drafting history of the Convention in current times.","PeriodicalId":83880,"journal":{"name":"Publications de la Cour europeenne des droits de l'homme. Serie A, Arrets et decisions = Publications of the European Court of Human Rights. Series A, Judgments and decisions. European Court of Human Rights","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"History as an afterthought: the (re)discovery of Article 18 in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights\",\"authors\":\"B. Çalı, Kristina Hatas\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3677678\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter investigates whether the recent heightened focus on Article 18, prohibiting restriction of rights for purposes not provided for in the Convention, in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights is a return to the origins of the Convention, which identified Article 18 as ringing ‘alarm bells’ against the subtle progression of totalitarianism in Europe. We examine the development of the Article 18 case law of the Court by reviewing all publicly available cases that have pleaded Article 18 before the former Commission and the ECtHR up until 2019. In light of this review, we find that the recent developments in the case law under Article 18 cannot be understood as returning to the origins of the Convention. It is a new development all together. We identify two reasons for the rediscovery of Article 18: the impetus to interpret the Convention progressively since its early days and the division amongst the bench of the Court as to how to interpret the drafting history of the Convention in current times.\",\"PeriodicalId\":83880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Publications de la Cour europeenne des droits de l'homme. Serie A, Arrets et decisions = Publications of the European Court of Human Rights. Series A, Judgments and decisions. European Court of Human Rights\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Publications de la Cour europeenne des droits de l'homme. Serie A, Arrets et decisions = Publications of the European Court of Human Rights. Series A, Judgments and decisions. European Court of Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3677678\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Publications de la Cour europeenne des droits de l'homme. Serie A, Arrets et decisions = Publications of the European Court of Human Rights. Series A, Judgments and decisions. European Court of Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3677678","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章调查了最近欧洲人权法院判例法中对第18条的高度关注,即禁止为《公约》未规定的目的限制权利,是否回到了《公约》的起源,该公约将第18条确定为对欧洲极权主义的微妙发展敲响了“警钟”。我们通过审查截至2019年在前欧洲人权委员会和欧洲人权法院审理的所有公开案件来审查法院第18条判例法的发展。根据这一审查,我们发现,根据第18条的判例法最近的发展不能被理解为回到《公约》的起源。这是一个全新的发展。我们确定了重新发现第18条的两个原因:自《公约》早期以来逐步解释《公约》的动力,以及法院法官在如何解释《公约》在当前时期的起草历史方面的分歧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
History as an afterthought: the (re)discovery of Article 18 in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights
This chapter investigates whether the recent heightened focus on Article 18, prohibiting restriction of rights for purposes not provided for in the Convention, in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights is a return to the origins of the Convention, which identified Article 18 as ringing ‘alarm bells’ against the subtle progression of totalitarianism in Europe. We examine the development of the Article 18 case law of the Court by reviewing all publicly available cases that have pleaded Article 18 before the former Commission and the ECtHR up until 2019. In light of this review, we find that the recent developments in the case law under Article 18 cannot be understood as returning to the origins of the Convention. It is a new development all together. We identify two reasons for the rediscovery of Article 18: the impetus to interpret the Convention progressively since its early days and the division amongst the bench of the Court as to how to interpret the drafting history of the Convention in current times.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Gramsci, Luhmann et le droit Droit et sociologie dialectique. Les mutations du droit selon Michel Freitag Le formalisme juridique d’apparence dans L’enracinement de Simone Weil (Londres – 1943) User du bon mot pour défendre son bon droit. Succession royale et enjeux de parenté de 1661 à 1715 Misyār, misfār, miṣyāf… les avatars récents du mariage « islamique » non conventionnel
×
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