Evolutionary trends in the interpretation of the European Court of Human Rights under the European Convention on Human Rights

Svitlana  Karvatska; Mariia  Blikhar; Nataliia  Huralenko

Svitlana Karvatska Department of Еuropean Law and Comparative Law Studies, Chernivtsi National University
Mariia Blikhar Department of Administrative and Informational Law, Lviv National University Lviv Polytechnic
Nataliia Huralenko Department of Human Rights, Faculty of Law, Chernivtsi National University

Keywords: evolutionary trends in legal interpretation, European Court of Human Rights, interpretation of rules of international law, consensus method, judicial activism

Abstract

The purpose of this Article is to analyse evolutionary trends in the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). To achieve this goal, a wide range of general philosophical methods were used. The Article submits that the ECHR has shown a growing commitment to the evolutionary method of interpretation, using the doctrine of a "living instrument", the ECHR, which is particularly important for Member States with specific problems, although this method limits the scope in the discretion of the State. It is concluded that the interpretative methodology used by the ECHR involves the use of its methods, including increasingly developing methods of consensus, efficiency, judicial activism, comparison, innovative interpretation, autonomous method, and "balance" method. This demonstrates, inter alia, the unlimited potential to improve the ECHR's interpretation of conventional standards. In the context of modern transformations in the direction of proactive international justice, judicial activism objectively departs from a formal application of legal norms and reflects the ECHR's desire to protect the fundamental human rights of individuals and communicatethem.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Svitlana Karvatska, Department of Еuropean Law and Comparative Law Studies, Chernivtsi National University

Doctor of Science in Law, Associate Professor, Department of Еuropean Law and Comparative Law Studies, Chernivtsi National University, Ukraine

Mariia Blikhar, Department of Administrative and Informational Law, Lviv National University Lviv Polytechnic

Doctor of Science in Law, Associate Professo, Department of Administrative and Informational Law, Lviv National University Lviv Polytechnic.

Nataliia Huralenko, Department of Human Rights, Faculty of Law, Chernivtsi National University

Doctor of Science in Law, Associate Professor, Department of Human Rights, Faculty of Law, Chernivtsi National University

References

BJORGE, Eirik. 2014. The Evolutionary Interpretation of Treaties. University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom.

BUTKEVICH, Volodymyr Grygorovych. 2010. European Convention on Human Rights: Genesis of intentions and law. Law of Ukraine. No. 10, pp. 82–83.

CHANG-FA, Lo. 2017. Treaty interpretation under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Springer Nature Singapore Pie Ltd. Gateway East, Singapore.

DJEFFAL, Christian. 2016. Static and evolutive treaty interpretation: A Functional reconsruction. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom.

DOTHAN, Shai. 2018. “The Motivations of Individual Judges and How They Act as a Group” In: German Law Journal. Vol. 19, No. 7, pp. 2165–2188.

DZEHTSIAROU, Kanstantsin. 2015. European Consensus and the Legitimacy of the European Court of Human Rights. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom.

ECHR. 2002. Case of Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom. Application no. 28957/95. Available online. In: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/pdf/?library=ECHR&id=002-5265&filename=002-5265.pdf&TID=ihgdqbxnfi. Consultation date: 14/12/2019.

ECHR. 2013. Case of Janowiec and Others v. Russia. Applicatiom no. 55508/07 and 29750/09. Available online. In: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{«itemid»[«001-127684(2)»]}. Consultation date: 14/12/2019.

EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS. 1950. (as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, supplemented by Protocols Nos. 1, 4, 6, 7, 12 and 13). Available online. In: https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf. Consultation date: 14/12/2019.

EVSEEV, Alexander Petrovich. 2015. How the European Court "judges" history (on the issue of judicial activism). Problems of legality: Collection of Scientific Works. Mudryi National Law University. Kharkiv, Yaroslav.

HARRIS, David John; O'BOYLE, Michael. 2014. Law of the European Convention on Human Rights / Ed. E. P. Bates, C. M. Buckley. 3nd ed. Oxford University Press. Oxford. United Kingdom. Available online. In: https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=NvH8AwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=ru#v=onepage&q&f=false. Consultation date: 14/12/2019.

HURALENKO, Nataliia; VOLOSHCHUK, Oksana; SLYVKA, Stepan. 2020. “Interpretive activity in the judge’s professional occupation” In: Amazonia Investiga. Vol. 9, No. 29, pp. 427-431. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2020.29.05.47. Consultation date: 14/02/2020.

INAGAKI, Osamu. 2015. “Evolutionary Interpretation of Treaties Re-examined: The Two-Stage Reasoning” In: Journal of International Cooperation Studies. Vol. 22, No. 2/3, pp. 127–128.

KARVATSKA, Svitana Bohdanivna. 2019. Dillemma of juridical activism in international justice. Scientific notes of Tavrida National V.I. Vernadsky University. Series "Legal studies". Tom 30 (69) num 1. Pp. 134–138.

KHARYTONOV, Evgen; KHARYTONOVA, Olena; KHARYTONOVA, Tetiana; KOLODIN, Denis; TOLMACHEVSKA, Yuliia. 2019. “Human rights as the basic value of the concept of private law in modern Europe” In: Amazonia Investiga. Vol 8. No. 20, pp. 477-485.

KOVLER, Anatoly. 2010. “Scylla and Charybdis of the European Court: Subsidiarity or Legal Activism?” In: Comparative Constitutional Review. Vol. 6, No. 79, pp. 90-100.

KRETOVA, Iryna Yuriivna. 2015. Interpretation of law: doctrines developed by the European Court of Human Rights. (Ph.D. Thesis): 12.00.01. Kharkiv, Ukraine.

MARSHALL, William P. 2002. “Conservatives and the Seven Sings of Juidcal Activizm” In: University of Colorado Law Review. Vol. 73, No. 4, pp. 1217–1255.

ORAKHELASHVSVILI, Alexander. 2008. The Interpretation of Acts and Rules in Public International Law. Сhap. 10. Oxford Unisversity Press. Oxford, United Kingdom.

SAVCHYN, Mykhailo. 2016. Freedom of judicial discretion in the light of the validity of decisions of courts of appeal and courts of cassation. Legal Bulletin of Ukraine. Available online. In: https://yvu.com.ua/svoboda-suddivskogo-rozsudu-u-svitli-obgruntovanosti-rishen-sudiv-apelyatsijnoyi-ta-kasatsijnoyi-instantsij/ Consultation date: 14/12/2019.

SHERRY, Suzanna. 2014. Why We Need More Juridical Activizm. Constitutionalism, Executive Power, and Popular Enlightenment: Vanderbilt Public Law Research Paper Num 13-3. Available online. In: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2213372. Consultation date: 14/02/2020.

TORP, Helmersen S. 2013. “Evolutive Treaty Interpretation: Legality, Semantics and Distinctions” In: European Journal of Legal Studies. Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 129–130.

TYMCHENKO, Leonid Dmytrovych; KONONENKO, Valerii Petrovych. 2012. International law: a handbook. Znanja. Knowledge. Avaliable online. In: http://westudents.com.ua/glavy/64772-69-tlumachennya-mjnarodnih- dogovorv.html. Consultation date: 18/06/2019.

VENZKE, Ingo. 2015. “Semantic Authority, Legal Change and the Dynamics of International Law” In: No Foundations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Law and Justice. Vol. 12, p. 1.

WILDHABER, Luzius. 1998. The place of the European Court of Human Rights in the European Constitutional landscape: Address. Conference of European Constitutional Courts XIIth Congress / Council of Europe. European Court of Human Rights. Available online. In: http://www.confeuconstco.org/reports/rep-xii/Report%20ECHR-EN.pdf. Consultation date: 14/02/2020.

ZAHAROVA, Larisa Ivanovna. 2016. The evolutionary approach in international law as a new trend in treaties interpretation. The future of international law: collection of articles. LLC "Prospect". Moscow, Russia.