Human Rights Watch v Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office: Victim Status,Extraterritoriality and the Search for Principled Reasoning

In Human Rights Watch v Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office the UK Investigatory Powers Tribunal found that the relevant standard of ‘victim status’ that applies in secret surveillance cases consists in a potential risk of being subjected to surveillance and that the European Convention on Human Rights does not apply to the surveillance of individuals who reside outside of the UK. This note argues that the Tribunal's finding regarding the victim status of the applicants was sound but that the underlying reasoning was not. It concludes that the Tribunal's finding on extraterritoriality is unsatisfactory and that its engagement with the European Court of Human Rights case law on the matter lacked depth. Finally, the note considers the defects of the Human Rights Watch case, and the case law on extraterritoriality more generally, against the backdrop of the place of principled reasoning in human rights adjudication.     

A Tort-Based Approach to Damages under the Human Rights Act 1998

This article argues that a strong case can be made for departing from the current approach to damages under the Human Rights Act 1998, and for the adoption of an alternative tort-based approach. The article critically analyses the English courts' arguments against adopting a tort-based approach and demonstrates that neither the Act nor the European Convention on Human Rights militate against such approach. It makes a positive case for a tort-based approach, arguing that the law of damages in tort provides an appropriate model for damages under the Act as a matter of principle given the common functions and protected interests that underpin both areas of the law. Further, tort law offers an established and elaborate corpus of principles to draw on, which can readily and naturally be read across to the human rights context. A tort-based approach would also promote consistency across English law, while generally affording greater protection to human rights than the English courts' current approach.     

Panel recommends significant changes to federal law against discrimination

In a report released on 23 June 2000, the Review Panel tasked by the federal Minister of Justice with reviewing the Canadian Human Rights Act made some welcome recommendations for improving the Act and the way the Canadian Human Rights Commission functions. Three are of particular significance: the recommendation that "social condition" be added to the prohibited grounds for discrimination listed in the Act; the recommendation that the Canadian Human Rights Commission should have, under its governing legislation, the duty to monitor and report to Parliament and the UN Human Rights Committee on the federal government's compliance with international human rights treaties regarding economic, social, and cultural rights; and the recommendation that "gender identity" should be expressly added to the Act as a prohibited ground of discrimination.     

Regulating surrogacy--a contravention of human rights?

On the 2nd of October 2000, The Human Rights Act 1998 came into full force, signalling the incorporation of The European Convention on Human Rights into U.K. law. Areas of law believed to be inconsistent with the Convention may now be challenged in both The European Court of Human Rights and domestic courts. This article considers whether existing laws on the regulation of access to infertility services, in particular surrogacy, will be deemed incompatible with the ECHR. Human rights as enshrined within Articles 8 and 12 will be examined in light of recent suggestions that there may arise legal challenges by those who have had access to reproductive services restricted or denied. It will be shown that, although existing and potential future controls may arguably infringe these rights, it is nevertheless unlikely that they will be held to be in contravention of The Human Rights Act 1998.     

The Hard Sell: Promoting Human Rights

The Human Rights Act 1998 is one of the most important constitutional reforms to have been implemented by the New Labour administration in Britain. In addition to incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic law, its main ambition is the creation of a human rights culture. However, while citizens appear to have very little understanding of what the legislation entails, there is a strong tide of negative media publicity which depicts the Human Rights Act as a ‘villains’ charter’. It has been suggested that the government should do more to promote human rights. This paper reflects on how this may be achieved. An important strategy for creating a positive public awareness of human rights involves eradicating myths which have been allowed to flourish in sections of the British press. However, drawing on the work of Roland Barthes, this paper argues that this may be an unattainable goal. Human rights are empty signifiers which invite mythical appropriation. Both proponents and detractors of human rights legislation mobilise this capacity for mythmaking in their rhetoric.     

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.     

Redfearn v UK: Political Association and Dismissal

In Redfearn v UK the European Court of Human Rights examined the question whether dismissal for membership of a political party is compatible with freedom of association under Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court endorsed a strong commitment to multi‐party democracy and protection of employees against the domination of the employers. This note discusses the judgment and its implications for UK law, looking at three key issues: first, whether the law of unfair dismissal provides effective protection against action that poses a threat to the enjoyment of Convention rights; second, the grounds under which an employer may justify the lawfulness of a dismissal that interferes with a Convention right; third, the available remedies against the employer when there is a breach of a Convention right.     

O'Keeffe v Ireland: The Liability of States for Failure to Provide an Effective System for the Detection and Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse in Education

In O'Keeffe v Ireland, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights found that Ireland failed to protect the applicant from sexual abuse suffered as a child in an Irish National School in 1973 and violated her rights under Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the European Convention on Human Rights. This note argues that the decision is important in expanding the Court's jurisprudence regarding positive obligations under Article 3 to child sexual abuse in a non‐state setting where there was no knowledge of a ‘real and immediate’ risk to the applicant. It also argues that the case raises concerns about the Court's methodology for the historical application of the Convention and about the interaction of Article 3 positive obligations with vicarious liability in common law tort regimes.     

EU Accession to the ECHR: Between Autonomy and Adaptation

After the European Union's accession to the European Convention on Human Rights the EU will become subject to legally binding judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and participate in statutory bodies of the Council of Europe (Parliamentary Assembly; Committee of Ministers) when they act under the Convention. Convention rights and their interpretation by the ECtHR will be directly enforceable against the EU institutions and against Member States when acting within the scope of EU law. This will vest the ECHR with additional force in a number of Member States, including Germany and the UK. All Member States will further be subject to additional constraints when acting under the Convention system. The article considers the reasons for, and consequences of the EU's primus inter pares position under the Convention and within the Council of Europe, and the likely practical effect of the EU's accession for its Member States.     

Every complaint matters: Human Rights Commissioner's opinion concerning independent and effective determination of complaints against the police

Police complaints are a developing area of European human rights law and criminal justice policy. In response to the risk of cultures of police impunity emerging in some European states the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights launched a police complaints initiative in 2008. Written by the consultant to the Commissioner this paper examines his recently published Opinion concerning independent and effective determination of complaints against the police. Firstly, an overview is presented of the different types of complaints mechanism currently operating across Europe. This is followed by an outline of the five police complaints principles developed in the jurisprudence of European Court of Human Rights and explanation of the two-tiered citizen oversight approach advocated in the Commissioner's Opinion. The paper concludes with a discussion of the importance of the principles as a means for ensuring that every police complaint is handled appropriately and proportionately.     

Accommodating Children's Rights in a Post Human Rights Act Era

This article considers why so little case law currently acknowledges that children have recognisable rights under the European Convention on Human Rights and argues that the family courts are not meeting the demands of the Human Rights Act 1998 in this regard. It suggests that a reinterpretation of the 'paramountcy principle' in the Children Act 1989 should be accompanied by a radically different judicial approach to evidence relating to children's best interests. The article considers the difficulties that such an approach might produce when applied to teenagers intent on refusing life-saving medical treatment. It further argues that the courts should call on the substantial body of rights jurisprudence to provide legal and moral support for this revised approach.     

Taking Care of Strasbourg: The Status of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights in Kosovo’s Domestic Legal System

This paper addresses the position of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case-law in Kosovo’s domestic legal order. To begin with, it reviews the background of the issue of human rights in Kosovo highlighting its distinct position and perspective. This article then analyses the position held by the European Convention on Human Rights and its protocols in Kosovo’s legal order while also addressing the ECHR’s constitutionalization, its direct effect and the constitutional review on basis of it. The paper then examines whether the case-law of the ECtHR is binding in Kosovo, whether it is directly effective, and whether Kosovo’s Constitutional Court can use it as a ground in the conduct of constitutional reviews. This paper argues that the ECHR and the case-law of the ECtHR both hold a privileged status under Kosovo’s constitutional law, despite Kosovo not being a party to the ECHR and, therefore, having no international liability to implement the ECHR. In addition, the paper offers certain arguments regarding the relative positions of the ECHR and the case-law of the ECtHR within the current practice of Kosovo’s judicial system. This paper concludes with the argument that the ECHR and the case-law of the ECtHR hold a privileged status in the context of Kosovo’s domestic legal order—one which could serve as a precedent in respecting human rights and freedoms.     

The Dissemination of Detainees Awaiting Trial Before International and Internationalized Criminal Tribunals

This paper will focus on the rights attributed to detainees who are facing charges before international and internationalized criminal courts. The question is whether their position merits a different approach compared to the position of detainees who are confronted with domestic criminal trials. In particular, this paper will address the question whether, and to what extent, international human rights have a direct effect on the position of the former detainees. Attention will focus on case law of the European Court of Human Rights vis-a-vis the rights of detainees and the impact thereof on the position of detainees who are held in custody on behalf of international and internationalized criminal courts. The author is Professor of International Criminal Law at Utrecht University (The Netherlands), defence counsel acting before the ICTY, ICTR and SCSL, and a partner of the law firm Knoops & Partners Advocaten in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.     

The Evolution of International Indigenous Rights in the Inter-American Human Rights System

Indigenous communities in the Western hemisphere are increasinglyrelying on international law and international fora for enforcementof their human rights. When there are no domestic laws thatrecognise indigenous rights, or such laws exist but there isno political will to enforce them, indigenous peoples in theAmericas may turn to the Inter-American human rights system.Consequently, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and theInter-American Commission on Human Rights have developed a progressivecase law in this area. In 2005 and 2006, the Inter-AmericanCourt decided seminal indigenous ancestral land rights casesand a political rights case. This article analyses these casesand the previous jurisprudence and decisions on indigenous rightsin the Inter-American system.     

Inhuman and Degrading Punishment,Dignity, and the Limits of Retribution

The recent judgment of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Vinter and others v United Kingdom provides a much needed clarification of the parameters of the prohibition on inhuman and degrading punishment under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as it applies to whole life orders of imprisonment under mandatory life sentences – essentially, life imprisonment without parole. The Grand Chamber's judgment refines Strasbourg doctrine on life imprisonment and the prospect of release and illuminates key principles concerning inhuman and degrading punishment under Article 3 of the ECHR. This article considers the judgment's profound significance in relation to both human rights and penology.     

Workplace Monitoring and the Right to Private Life at Work

In Barbulescu v Romania, the European Court of Human Rights clarified the application of the Article 8 right to private life in the workplace, and the extent of the state's positive obligations to protect the right against workplace monitoring. The decision establishes that there is an irreducible core to the right to private life at work that does not depend on an employee's reasonable expectations of privacy, and sets out clear principles for striking a fair balance between Article 8 and the employer's interests in the context of workplace monitoring. This article considers the nature of states’ positive obligation to protect human rights at work, the scope of the right to private life, and the impact of the decision on domestic law of unfair dismissal.     

Accommodating Religious Beliefs: Harm,Clothing or Symbols,and Refusals to Serve Others

Is there a middle path between the existing case law of the European Court of Human Rights, which rarely requires accommodation of a religious individual's beliefs, and a ‘general right to conscientious objection’, which would exempt religious individuals from all anti‐discrimination and other rules interfering with manifestations of their beliefs? The author argues that failure to accommodate is better analysed as prima facie indirect discrimination, to highlight the exclusionary effects of non‐accommodation on religious minorities, and that the presence or absence of direct or indirect harm to others (or cost, disruption or inconvenience to the accommodating party) could guide case‐by‐case assessments of whether the prima facie indirect discrimination is justified. The author then applies a harm analysis to the examples of religious clothing or symbols and religiously motivated refusals to serve others, recently considered by the European Court of Human Rights in Eweida and Others v United Kingdom.     

11 September 2001, Counter-terrorism, and the Human Rights Act

The attacks of 11 September 2001 and the reaction to them has been the gravest challenge to date to the Human Rights Act 1998. The Antiterrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 has expanded the remit of the Terrorism Act 2000 and there has been a new concentration on antiterrorism by government. This article assesses the impact of human rights law on the debate about liberty and security following 11 September. It considers how the provisions of the Human Rights Act have influenced the formulation and interpretation of anti-terrorism laws, and examines the role of the judiciary in adjudicating on disputes between the individual and the state. It ends with some general discussion about the security-driven challenges to human rights that lie ahead.     

No child left behind in the European Union?: the position of Romani children

This paper analyses how different EU documents (communications, recommendations, reports and surveys, etc.) focusing on Roma frame the position of Romani children. Many studies have shown that because of their intersectional positioning, Romani children often face multiple discrimination and triple exclusion: on the basis of their ethnicity, their age and their socio-economic status. The paper comments on selected findings on Roma in the Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey published by the Fundamental Rights Agency in late 2016. One of the main findings of this Survey was that 80% of Roma live below the country-specific risk of poverty line in all EU Member States in which the Survey has been conducted. By specifically examining the implication this finding has for the position of Romani children, I argue that their position is, in fact, produced and reproduced with systemic, but also everyday racism. When it comes to Roma, but specifically Romani children, not even the European Union (EU), based on principles of fundamental human rights, is immune to such phenomena.     

Horizontal Effect and the Constitutional Constraint

This article offers a new interpretation – the ‘constitutional constraint’ model – of the duty the Human Rights Act imposes on the courts to give horizontal effect to European Convention rights through the common law. The model requires courts to develop the common law compatibly with the Convention, but only where compatibility can be achieved by incremental development. We argue that models requiring more than incremental development are unsustainable; that deep constitutional norms compel the constraint of incrementalism, which is preserved under the HRA; and that by virtue of section 2 of the HRA, Convention rights function as principles rather than hard‐edged rights in this context. This further undermines the idea that the courts must strictly apply Convention rights and cannot allow them to be overridden by non‐Convention factors. The final section explores the nature of incrementalism in this context and the impact of the model on the doctrine of judicial precedent.