Assisted suicide under the European Convention on Human Rights: a critique

In a high profile case, a terminally ill woman, Diane Pretty, challenged the United Kingdom prohibition on assisted suicide as incompatible with certain fundamental rights which are guaranteed under the European Convention on Human Rights. Mrs Pretty's battle was ultimately unsuccessful, with a total of three courts and 15 judges ruling against her. Such unanimity of opinion might well be thought to represent the coup de grace for arguments about the right to assistance in death under European human rights law. However, in this article it is suggested that, in limited circumstances, such assistance might yet still be possible under the Constitution.     

Adoption,Homosexuality and the European Convention on Human Rights: Gas and Dubois v France

On 15 March 2012 the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) issued its first judgment addressing the differential treatment of same‐sex and opposite‐sex couples in respect of the adoption of a child. 1 The Court held that excluding same‐sex couples in civil partnerships, who have no legal right to marry, from adoption provisions available to married opposite‐sex couples does not violate rights guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention). I argue that the Court's reasoning in Gas and Dubois v France is unpersuasive and unsustainable in light of its wider case law.     

Enforcing the Child's Right to Know Her Origins: Contrasting Approaches Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the European Convention on Human Rights

The justification of the child's right to know her origins andthe fundamental interests underlying it have attracted a lotof attention in recent years. This article goes one step furtherand assesses that right's enforcement in practice together withits guiding principles. It starts by restating what the rightconsists in and what interests it protects according to differentinternational human rights instruments. It then reveals theconflicts of rights that lie at the heart of the implementationof the right to know and explain its complexity. After consideringthe competing interests present, the article argues that noneof these interests and rights should be regarded as absoluteand suggests ways in which they can be balanced against eachother. The recent evolution in the European Court of Human Rights(ECtHR) case law with its more nuanced balancing of the competingrights is contrasted with the Convention on the Rights of theChild (CRC)'s focus on the child's paramount interest. The articleargues that these different approaches are reflected in nationallegal orders in Europe. By tracing the origins of this divergenceback to those conflicting international legal paradigms andby proposing abstract adjudication principles to guide the concretebalancing of competing rights, the article hopes to contributeto a better understanding and ultimate reconciliation of thechild's multiple identities – social and biological.     

Human rights of persons with mental disabilities. The European Convention of Human Rights

It is not necessary to recount the numerous charters and declarations ... to understand human rights.... All persons are born free and equal in dignity and rights. Everyone ... is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in the international human rights instruments without discrimination, such as the rights to life, liberty, security of the person, privacy, health, education, work, social security, and to marry and found a family. Yet, violations of human rights are a reality to be found in every corner of the globe.     

Incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into UK Law: Implications for education

This article focuses on the UK government's proposal to incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law, and the consequences of incorporation for the individual in the context of education. The first part of the article explores the mechanisms proposed for bringing about incorporation, and stresses in particular the importance attached by the government to upholding the fundamental principle of the sovereignty of the UK Parliament. In this context it emphasises the government's decision to deny to the British courts the capacity to strike down legislative provisions as being incompatible with Convention rights. The second part of the article goes on to explore (highly selectively) a number of key areas in which incorporation of the ECHR has the potential to enhance individual rights in the field of education, including parental choice of school, collective worship and religious education, and aspects of the secular curriculum. The discussion emphasises strongly the likely significance of the UK government's reservation to the second sentence of Article 2 of the First Protocol to the ECHR. Broadly, the conclusion drawn is that the incorporation of the Convention will have only a very marginal impact on the reality of individual rights to education.     

Negative governmentality through fundamental rights: The far side of the European Convention on Human Rights

This essay analyses those statements that mention legal norms in negative terms. Specifically, it analyses those statements that define a legal system by mentioning how legal protection does not work and where legal protection ends, and those statements that identify what rights‐holders do not have to with their legally protected free capacities. This essay argues that these statements address a systemic question. It calls such a dynamic as negative governmentality. The argument proceeds in four steps. It introduces the concept of negative governmentality by arguing that the idea of freedom requires both the positive affirmation of moral agency and the constraining of moral agency (Section 2 ). It then explores how rights constitute freedom by limiting rights or making exceptions to them (Section 3 ). Later, it analyses how rights‐based norms prevent abuse of rights by holders of rights (Section 4 ). Finally, it sees how rights‐based norms constrain the legal guarantor of rights, i.e., a state (Section 5 ). The essay concludes by mentioning the importance of negative governmentality (Section 6 ).