Human Rights Principles Interpretation in the Context of the ECHR

Authors

  • Svitlana KARVATSKA Institute of International Relations Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
  • Lubov ZAMORSKA Philosophy and Theory of Law at Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University, Ukraine

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18662/eljpa/37

Keywords:

ECHR, ECtHR, Convention law, interpretation of law, interpretative principles, judicial activism, court practice, national legislation.

Abstract

European system of human rights protection, with the European Convention of human rights and fundamental freedoms protection from 1950 as its basis, is the most effective among existing regional systems of human rights protection. Effective protection of individual civil and political rights according to the UCHR (european convention of human rights) in the countries of Central-Eastern, South-Eastern Europe and the former USSR is impossible without clear comprehension of the Convention interpretation principles, which will allow to take into consideration new social-economic and political conditions. The instances of the interpretation principles use in the EctHR cases, versus Ukraine in particular, give chance to display potential possibilities to widen the Convention of human rights protection application spheres and to perfect national legislation and legal-realization practice. The investigation and study of the principles for the interpretation of the Convention about the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms are important in terms of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the interpretation activities both the European Court of Human Rights and national authorities applying the Convention, where predominantly techno-dogmatic methods of interpretation are spread and there are no sufficient skills to use precedents in law enforcement practice, judicial, in particular. Comprehension and clarifying the principles of interpretation of the Convention provisions and their practical application to the decisions of the ECtHR allow not only to solve the problems of legal proceedings, but rather the problems of social regulation. political, economic. Interpretative principles are an important basis for ensuring the proper implementation of the right to a fair trial at the national level.

References

. Patterson D. Interpretation in Law. San Diego Law Review. 2005; 42: 685-710.

.Khrystova HO. Pozytyvni zobovʺyazannya derzhavy v systemi doktrynalʹnykh pidkhodiv do tlumachennya i zastosuvannya Yevropeysʹkoyi konventsiyi z prav lyudyny. Teoriya ta praktyka pravoznavstva. 2014; 2 (6). Available from: http://nauka.jur-academy.kharkov.ua/ download/el_zbirnik/2.2014/47.pdf

. Scalia A, Garner BA. Reading Law. The Interpretation of Legal Texts. St. Paul: West Publishing Company; 2012.

. Pozner RA. Problemy yurysprudentsiyi. Kyyiv: Akta; 2004.

. Rabinovych PM, Fedyk SY. Osoblyvosti tlumachennya yurydychnykh norm shchodo prav lyudyny (za materialamy praktyky Yevropeysʹkoho sudu z prav lyudyny). Lʹviv: Astron; 2004.

. Senden HCK. Interpretation of Fundamental Rights in a Multilevel Legal System. An analysis of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. Doctoral Thesis, Leiden University. School of Human Rights Research Series. 2011; 46.

. Letsas G. A Theory of Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.

.Maringele S. European Human Rights Law. The Work of European Court of Human Rights Illustrated by an Assortment of Selected Cases. Hamburg: Anchor Academic Publishing; 2014.

. Makbrayd D. Yevropeysʹka konventsiya z prav lyudyny ta kryminalʹnyy protses. Kyyiv: K.I.S.; 2010.

. Marochini M. The Interpretation of the European Convention of Human Rights. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu. 2014; 51 (1): 63-84.

. Soering v. The UK, Series A No. 161, 1989 Jul 07.

. Council of Europe. A general introduction to the ECHR. Distance Learning Course on Anti-discrimination Issues. Available from: http://help.ppa.coe.int/course/view.php?id=185.

.Harris DJ, O’Boyle M, Warbrick C. Law of the European Convention on Human Rights. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.

. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols No. 11 and 14. Available from: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/Commun/QueVoulezVous.asp?NT=005&CM=8&DF =27/07/2010&CL=ENG.

. Airey V. Ireland, No. 6289/73, 1979 Oct 06.

. Stanev V. Bulgaria, No. 36760/06, 2012 Jan 17.

.Hirst V. The United Kingdom, No. 74025/01, 2005 Oct 06.

. Calmanovici V. Romania, No. 42250/02, 2008 Jul 01.

. Frodl V. Austria, No. 20201/04, 2010 Apr 08.

. Scoppola v. Italy, No. 126/05, 2011 Jan 18.

.Interim Resolution CM/ResDH(2009)160. Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights. Hirst v. the United Kingdom No. 2 (application No. 74025/01, Grand Chamber judgment of 2005 Oct 06).

. Dzhenis M, Key R, Bredli E. Yevropeysʹke pravo u haluzi prav lyudyny: dzherela i praktyka zastosuvannya. Kyyiv: Artek; 1997.

.Brogan and Others v. United Kingdom, Nos. 11209/84, 11234/84, 11266/84, 11386/85, 1988 Nov 29.

.Intersplav V. Ukraine, No. 803/02), 9 January 2007.

. Brannigan and McBride v. United Kingdom, No. 14553/89; 14554/89, 1993 May 25.

.Strizhak V. Ukraine, No. 72269/01, 2005 Nov 08.

.Pronina V. Ukraine, No. 63566/00, 2006 Jul 18.

Downloads

Published

2018-12-17

How to Cite

KARVATSKA, S., & ZAMORSKA, L. (2018). Human Rights Principles Interpretation in the Context of the ECHR. European Journal of Law and Public Administration, 5(2), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.18662/eljpa/37