Article 18 ECHR as a New Pillar of Judicial Independence and Separation of Powers

The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights on Article 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights has been significantly evolving the past years. In light, of this jurisprudential evolution, the present paper explores the connection between Article 18 violations and the principles of judicial independence and separation of powers. It explores, in particular, the extent to which such violations operate as ‘barometer’ and, in some cases, as ‘verdict’ even on the sanity of judicial independence and separation of powers within a State

Article 18 ECHR as a New Pillar of Judicial Independence and Separation of Powers

The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights on Article 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights has been significantly evolving the past years. In light, of this jurisprudential evolution, the present paper explores the connection between Article 18 violations and the principles of judicial independence and separation of powers. It explores, in particular, the extent to which such violations operate as ‘barometer’ and, in some cases, as ‘verdict’ even on the sanity of judicial independence and separation of powers within a State

Islandness and the European Court of Human Rights:Marooning Rights on Islands?

Some 80 million people live on European islands. It thus comes as no surprise that a number of cases brought before the European Court of Human Rights developed on and/or pertain to islands. What is surprising, though, is that this jurisprudential corpus has not been explored with a view to assessing whether islandness has or should have a role in the implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights on islands. The present paper contemplates the strengths of an islandness-based approach in the implementation of human rights through the mapping of the weaknesses, the potentials and the lost opportunities in the case law of the Court with respect to such an approach. In this context, findings from the field of Island Studies are also considered. By focusing on the ECHR habitat, the present paper exemplifies, in particular, the untapped potential of an islandness-based approach in the development of international human rights law in general

The Role of Civil Society in Monitoring the Executive in the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights:Recasting the Rule of Law

This article explores the role of civil society in checking the executive as reflected in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. Although this role is traditionally associated with the judiciary and the legislative, in light of the institutional mutations in modern States, the ECtHR case-law envisages a multitude of forms through which civil society can check the government and thus uphold the ‘rule of law from below’. In addressing this recasting of the rule of law, the article discusses in particular the role of good and bad faith. The ECtHR case-law on the 'mala fides' restrictions of rights under Article 18 ECHR highlights the idea that the checking of the executive by civil society is even more crucial in States where the rule of law is systematically suffering and thus the civil society is the only entity within the State that can genuinely check the executive. The civil society, on its part, should exercise these checking functions in good faith

Islandness and the European Court of Human Rights:Marooning Rights on Islands?

Some 80 million people live on European islands. It thus comes as no surprise that a number of cases brought before the European Court of Human Rights developed on and/or pertain to islands. What is surprising, though, is that this jurisprudential corpus has not been explored with a view to assessing whether islandness has or should have a role in the implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights on islands. The present paper contemplates the strengths of an islandness-based approach in the implementation of human rights through the mapping of the weaknesses, the potentials and the lost opportunities in the case law of the Court with respect to such an approach. In this context, findings from the field of Island Studies are also considered. By focusing on the ECHR habitat, the present paper exemplifies, in particular, the untapped potential of an islandness-based approach in the development of international human rights law in general

Article 18 ECHR as a New Pillar of Judicial Independence and Separation of Powers

The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights on Article 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights has been significantly evolving the past years. In light, of this jurisprudential evolution, the present paper explores the connection between Article 18 violations and the principles of judicial independence and separation of powers. It explores, in particular, the extent to which such violations operate as ‘barometer’ and, in some cases, as ‘verdict’ even on the sanity of judicial independence and separation of powers within a State

Islandness and the European Court of Human Rights:Marooning Rights on Islands?

Some 80 million people live on European islands. It thus comes as no surprise that a number of cases brought before the European Court of Human Rights developed on and/or pertain to islands. What is surprising, though, is that this jurisprudential corpus has not been explored with a view to assessing whether islandness has or should have a role in the implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights on islands. The present paper contemplates the strengths of an islandness-based approach in the implementation of human rights through the mapping of the weaknesses, the potentials and the lost opportunities in the case law of the Court with respect to such an approach. In this context, findings from the field of Island Studies are also considered. By focusing on the ECHR habitat, the present paper exemplifies, in particular, the untapped potential of an islandness-based approach in the development of international human rights law in general