Judicial Dialogue On Human Rights

A comprehensive analysis of the extent, method, purpose and effects of domestic and international courts' judicial dialogue on human rights.

The book presents a critical assessment on the use of human rights case law by international criminal tribunals. Based on the inadequacies highlighted though this analysis, the book propounds a coherent method to transfer human rights standards into international criminal justice.

Human rights have transformed the way in which we conceive the place of the individual within the community and in relation to the state in a vast array of disciplines, including law, philosophy, politics, sociology, geography. The published output on human rights over the last five decades has been enormous, but has remained tightly bound to a notion of human rights as dialectically linking the individual and the state. Because of human rights’ dogged focus on the state and its actions, they have very seldom attracted the attention of legal pluralists. Indeed, some may have viewed the two as simply incompatible or relating to wholly distinct phenomena. This collection of essays is the first to bring together authors with established track records in the fields of legal pluralism and human rights, to explore the ways in which these concepts can be mutually reinforcing, delegitimizing, or competing. The essays reveal that there is no facile conclusion to reach but that the question opens avenues which are likely to be mined for years to come by those interested in how human rights can affect the behaviour of individuals and institutions.

This book provides an innovative analysis of the complex issue of judicial convergence and fragmentation in international human rights law, moving the conversation forward from the assessment of the two phenomena and investigating their triggering factors. With a wide geographical focus that include the most up-to-date case-law from the three main regional systems (the African, European and Inter-American) and the UN Human Rights Committee, the book confirms the predominant judicial convergence across international human rights law. On this basis, the book engages with an interdisciplinary investigation into the legal and non-legal factors that could explain both convergence and fragmentation, ranging from the use of judicial dialogue and the notions of necessity and proportionality to the composition of the courts and the role of NGOs. The aim is to provide the tools to understand the dynamics between human rights adjudicatory bodies and possibly foresee future instances of judicial fragmentation.

In recent years the European and Inter-American human rights courts have intensified their cooperation. This judicial dialogue is important given the similarity of the rights and freedoms protected by the respective treaties governing the work of the two courts, and the existence of equivalent criteria of admissibility and principles of interpretation. Moreover, the increasing similarity of the issues brought before the two courts has conferred a new relevance on their respective bodies of case-law. This book, published in English and Spanish, presents a selection of the leading decisions delivered by each court in 2014. In addition to their importance in their own right, some of these cases also serve to illustrate parallels in the manner in which the two conventions are interpreted, areas where the methodology diverges and, most importantly, how the two courts are increasingly having regard to each other's approach to human-rights protection. [Subject: Human Rights Law, Comparative Law]

This volume examines the implementation of the Return Directive from the perspective of judicial dialogue. While the role of judges has been widely addressed in European asylum law and EU law more generally, their role in EU return policy has hitherto remained under explored. This volume addresses the interaction and dialogue between domestic judiciaries and European courts in the implementation of European return policy. The book brings together leading authors from various backgrounds, including legal scholars, judges and practitioners. This allows the collection to offer theoretical and practical perspectives on important questions regarding the regulation of irregular migration in Europe, such as: what constitutes inadequate implementation of the Directive and under which conditions can judicial dialogue solve it? How can judges ensure that the right balance is struck between effective return procedures and fundamental rights? Why do we see different patterns of judicial dialogue in the Member States when it comes to particular questions of return policy, for example regarding the use of detention? These questions are more timely than ever given the shifting public discourse on immigration and the growing political backlash against immigration courts. This book will be essential reading for all scholars and practitioners in the fields of immigration law and policy, EU law and public law.

An assessment of judicial convergence and fragmentation in international human rights law and their legal and non-legal triggering factors.

Nussberger traces the history of the European Court of Human Rights from its political context in the 1940s to the present day, answering pressing questions about its origins and workings. This first book in the Elements of International Law series, provides a fresh, objective, and non-argumentative approach to the European Court of Human Rights.