Heteronormativity and the European Court of Human Rights

This article examines a recent judgment by the European Court of Human Rights (E.B. v France) that upheld the complaint of a homosexual woman who alleged that her application for authorization to adopt a child had been refused by domestic French authorities on the grounds of her sexual orientation. I argue that the judgment constitutes an innovative and atypical legal consideration of, and challenge to, the heteronormative social relations of contemporary European societies. After exploring the evidence presented by the applicant, and the Court’s interpretation of it, I argue that in order to reach its judgment it was necessary for the Court to make a significant departure from its established jurisprudence in relation to sexual orientation. An essential element of this involved the adoption of a distinctive critical approach, strongly resonant with aspects of ‘queer theory’, which focused attention on the social, cultural and political construction of normative heterosexuality. Whilst a number of commentators have assessed the importance of the judgment in terms of its evolution of ‘gay rights’ in the area of family life, I argue that the Court’s reconceptualized ‘theoretical’ understanding of, and critical approach to, heteronormativity offers the potential to expand the scope of the European Convention on Human Rights across a number of areas of social life—in marriage, public assembly, freedom of expression, as well as family life—where non-heterosexuals continue to face discrimination in contemporary Europe.     

Mapping Human Rights, Reading the European Union

Abstract: The EU's human rights policy has provoked increasing scholarly attention over the last decade. Yet rarely has it been subjected to rigorous analysis in the context of any integration theory. This article is an attempt to rectify the omission. By building on the approach of historical institutionalism, whilst at the same time recognising its analytical deficiencies, a method of reading the EU and interpreting its human rights policies is promoted. Specifically, the article contends that an analysis based on the textual nature of the EU and the configuration of this text through ‘institutional narrative’ will enable a better understanding of the institutional logic behind the construction of human rights policy. An agenda for research and analysis is thus suggested that might map the development of human rights in the EU and predict the compass of future policy direction more effectively.     

Networks of European National Human Rights Institutions

This article concerns the networks of European national human rights institutions (NHRIs). It examines how the sharing of best practices takes place through networks and how NHRIs achieve cooperation at both the international and regional levels. The article also analyses NHRI cooperation within three organisations: the United Nations, the Council of Europe and the EU. While cooperation at the international level facilitates their accreditation according to their compliance with the Paris Principles and enables them to participate in the sessions of the Human Rights Council, cooperation at the European level allows them to exchange information on issues of common concern and strengthens their relationship with regional bodies. In Europe, NHRIs cooperate with the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe and might also do so with the recently established Fundamental Rights Agency of the EU.     

The Creativity of the European Court of Human Rights

This article discusses the creative role adopted by the EuropeanCourt of Human Rights in the face of situations not envisagedby the drafters of the European Convention in the late 1940s,resulting from the inevitable evolution of societies and theirchanging ethical standards. Although the Vienna Convention onthe Law of Treaties 1969 is a constant source of inspirationto the Court for the interpretation of the Convention, the articlepoints to two new techniques of interpretation adopted by theCourt, namely the ‘living instrument’ doctrine andthe ‘practical and effective’ doctrine. An attemptis made to highlight the advantages and the weaknesses of bothof these innovative interpretational approaches. Additionally,an assessment is made of how the Court has responded to present-daydemands and maintained a balance between judicial creativityand respect for the role of member States as the key policy-makersin determining the scope of rights guaranteed by the Convention.     

Separate opinions in the European Court of Human Rights

Separate opinions, both concurring and dissenting, have beena feature of judgments of the European Court of Human Rightssince its earliest days, but detailed studies of their incidenceand impact have until recently been sparse. This article, basedon an AHRC-funded research study, offers a survey of the researchliterature and describes the outcome of its own considerationof such opinions. The use of separate opinions in the EuropeanCourt of Human Rights is significant, but the incidence of soledissents by national judges is very low. It would appear thatthe main determining factor in the writing of a separate opinionis judicial temperament. There is some evidence that the backgroundof judges prior to their election to the Court has some influenceon their approach to writing separate opinions. The Court, however,demonstrates high levels of collegiality and the use of separateopinions contributes to the transparency of its decision-making.     

The Child in European Human Rights Law

This article examines the category of ‘the child’ in European human rights law, based on an analysis of the child‐related jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. It argues that a full account of legal selfhood is constructed through the notion of ‘the child’ in this jurisprudence. The two notions – of ‘the child’ and ‘the self’ – are, from the outset, mutually dependent. The conceptualisation of ‘the child’ in human rights law is underpinned by an account of the self as originating in another and childhood is cast as enabling self‐understanding by making possible the formation of a narrative about the self. The vision of ‘the self’ that emerges is one of ‘the narrative self’, and I assess the implications of this both for the idea of childhood in which this narrative originates and for the vision of the human condition that is expressed in European human rights law more broadly.     

The Open Architecture of European Human Rights Law

The evolution of the European human rights regime is often described as the development of an integrated order with the European Convention of Human Rights as its governing 'constitutional instrument'. It is argued that the regime is better regarded as pluralist - characterised by a heterarchical relationship between its constituent parts that is ultimately defined politically and not legally. The emergence and workings of this pluralist order are traced through the interaction of the European Court of Human Rights with domestic courts in the European Union. These cases not only show conflicts over questions of ultimate supremacy but also significant convergence and harmony in practice. The analysis of the factors leading to this convergence indicates that central characteristics of pluralism – incrementalism and the openness of ultimate authority – have contributed significantly to the generally smooth evolution of the European human rights regime. This suggests a broader appeal of pluralist models as alternatives to constitutionalism in the construction of postnational authority and law.     

The European Union and Human Rights: Towards A Post-National Human Rights Institution?

There is growing evidence that the European Union (EU) is becomingmore involved in human rights protection and has the capacityto turn into an unprecedented post-national human rights protectioninstitution. Based on that evidence, this article suggests differentarguments in favour of a further development in this direction.These arguments stem not only from a general global justiceapproach to post-national institutions’ responsibilities,but also from the concept of human rights itself and the specificneeds of human rights protection at the post-national level.The EU's institutional framework presents advantages that fitthe general criteria of institutional design in the human rightscontext. Of course, many doubts and critiques may be raisedagainst an entity which started primarily as a functional andeconomic institution, and important reforms, some of which areventured in the present article, are still needed to get theEU closer to this institutional ideal. More generally, the articleemphasises the unique example and precedent the EU may constitutefor normative institutional thinking about global justice atthe post-national level.     

Mentally disordered offenders and the European Court of Human Rights

Mentally disordered offenders find themselves at the intersection of the healthcare system and the criminal justice system in most European countries. Decisions on their care often involve lengthy discussions in relation to care versus control in society. In this article, the focus is on one aspect of this debate — that of human rights. An analysis of cases, taken to the European Court of Human Rights by mentally disordered offenders, demonstrates the difficulties inherent in ensuring appropriate care to individuals and safeguards to the public at the same time. The issues raised include the problems raised by indeterminate sentences, the use of detention for preventive purposes, and debates about treatment.The countries represented in this selection of cases are Belgium, Norway, Poland, the Netherlands, Russia and the United Kingdom.     

A Human Rights Law of Internal Armed Conflict: The European Court of Human Rights in Chechnya

The cases on Chechnya recently decided by the European Courtof Human Rights force us to re-evaluate the relationship betweenhuman rights law and humanitarian law. Since the InternationalCourt of Justice held that humanitarian law is lex specialisto human rights law in 1996 – if not since the TehranConference of 1968 – it has been widely accepted that‘human rights in armed conflict’ refers to humanitarianlaw. The ECtHR has directly applied human rights law to theconduct of hostilities in internal armed conflicts. The rulesit has applied may prove controversial, but humanitarian law’slimited substantive scope and poor record of achieving compliancein internal armed conflicts suggest the importance of this newapproach.     

A Reductionist Penal Policy and European Human Rights Standards

Official discourse in many European countries advocates the use of imprisonment as a measure of last resort. This principle is also at the core of several Recommendations of the Council of Europe and a Resolution of the European Parliament. In practice, detention rates in European countries vary greatly, and many countries have witnessed an increase in their prison population. This article argues that the application of deprivation of liberty raises in itself a human rights issue, and considers the support that European human rights instruments give to a reductionist penal policy. It concludes by defending a normative argument in favour of rethinking the principle of proportionality in its application to imprisonment.     

欧洲人权法院——超国家的人权保护法律机构

欧洲国家对公民基本权利的保护不仅体现在国内立法、执法、司法等环节,而且,还通过创设国家间的法律文件和机构来促进和监督各国人权保护状况。欧洲人权法院就是致力于保护人权的一个超国家的法律机构。本文从欧洲人权法院设立的历史背景、运行机制、对成员国的影响等方面,对欧洲人权法院作一概要介绍,以飨读者。一、历史背景欧洲人权法院与欧洲司法法院是两个完全不同的机构。后者位于卢森堡,是欧洲联盟的一个法律机构。前者位于法国斯特拉斯堡市,是欧洲理事会的一个专门法律机构。欧洲人权法院设立于1959年,设立根据是《保护人权及基本自…