Atjaunināt sīkdatņu piekrišanu

Constitutionalist Approach to the European Convention on Human Rights: The Legitimacy of Evolutive and Static Interpretation [Hardback]

(Karl-Franzens University Graz, Austria)
  • Formāts: Hardback, 224 pages, height x width: 234x156 mm
  • Sērija : Hart Studies in Constitutional Theory
  • Izdošanas datums: 24-Mar-2022
  • Izdevniecība: Hart Publishing
  • ISBN-10: 150994687X
  • ISBN-13: 9781509946877
Citas grāmatas par šo tēmu:
  • Hardback
  • Cena: 101,78 €*
  • * ši ir gala cena, t.i., netiek piemērotas nekādas papildus atlaides
  • Standarta cena: 119,74 €
  • Ietaupiet 15%
  • Grāmatu piegādes laiks ir 3-4 nedēļas, ja grāmata ir uz vietas izdevniecības noliktavā. Ja izdevējam nepieciešams publicēt jaunu tirāžu, grāmatas piegāde var aizkavēties.
  • Daudzums:
  • Ielikt grozā
  • Piegādes laiks - 4-6 nedēļas
  • Pievienot vēlmju sarakstam
Constitutionalist Approach to the European Convention on Human Rights: The Legitimacy of Evolutive and Static InterpretationPalielināt
  • Formāts: Hardback, 224 pages, height x width: 234x156 mm
  • Sērija : Hart Studies in Constitutional Theory
  • Izdošanas datums: 24-Mar-2022
  • Izdevniecība: Hart Publishing
  • ISBN-10: 150994687X
  • ISBN-13: 9781509946877
Citas grāmatas par šo tēmu:
Permanent link: https://www.kriso.lv/db/9781509946877.html
Keywords:
"This book presents a new constitutional argument for the legitimacy of evolutive interpretation of the ECHR. It constructs a model, in which evolutive and static constitutional principles are balanced with each other. The author argues that there are three possible interpretive approaches in time-sensitive interpretations of the ECHR, but that only one of them is justifiable by reference to the constitutional principles of the ECHR in every single case. The ECHR's constitutional principles either require an evolutive or static interpretation or they do not establish a preference relation at all, which leads to a margin of appreciation of the member states in the interpretation of the Convention. The balancing model requires the determination of the weights of the competing evolutive and static constitutional principles. For this purpose, the author defines weighting factors for determining the importance of evolutive or static interpretation in a concrete case"--

This book presents a new constitutional argument for the legitimacy of evolutive interpretation of the ECHR. It constructs a model, in which evolutive and static constitutional principles are balanced with each other.

The author argues that there are three possible interpretive approaches in time-sensitive interpretations of the ECHR, but that only one of them is justifiable by reference to the constitutional principles of the ECHR in every single case.

The ECHR's constitutional principles either require an evolutive or static interpretation or they do not establish a preference relation at all, which leads to a margin of appreciation of the member states in the interpretation of the Convention. The balancing model requires the determination of the weights of the competing evolutive and static constitutional principles. For this purpose, the author defines weighting factors for determining the importance of evolutive or static interpretation in a concrete case.

Papildus informācija

This book takes a fresh look at the legitimacy of evolutive interpretation of the ECHR. It constructs a balancing model, in which evolutive and static constitutional principles are balanced with each other.
Foreword v
List of Abbreviations
xi
Table of Cases
xiii
Legal Documents and Reports xvii
Introduction 1(12)
PART I FUNDAMENTALS
1 On the Concepts of Law and Human Rights
13(4)
I The Dual Nature of Law
13(1)
II The Concept of Human Rights
14(3)
2 A New Concept of Evolutive and Static Interpretation
17(11)
I Evolutive Interpretation Within a Normative Theory of Interpretation
18(3)
II Evolutive Interpretation as an Element of the Time Dimension of Interpretation
21(2)
III Static Interpretation as the Parameter for Evolutive Interpretation
23(5)
3 The Legitimacy of Evolutive Interpretation Revisited
28(34)
I Evolutive Interpretation and the ECHR
30(11)
A European Consensus
30(5)
B Moral Reading and States' Commitment
35(4)
C Rights Principle
39(2)
II Evolutive Interpretation and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
41(15)
A Parties' Intentions
42(5)
B Object and Purpose
47(4)
C Other Rules of International Law Applicable in the Relations between Parties
51(3)
D Effectiveness
54(2)
III Evolutive Interpretation and General Principles of International Law
56(6)
A Objectivity of the Law
57(1)
B Human Dignity
58(2)
C Pro Persona Interpretation
60(2)
4 The Criticism against Evolutive Interpretation Revisited
62(23)
I Democratic Legitimacy of Evolutive Interpretation
63(8)
A The Conceptual Problem of the Critique
65(3)
B The Problematic Positioning of Evolutive Interpretation
68(3)
II Sovereignty
71(6)
A Evolutive Interpretation as the Creation of New Obligations
72(3)
B The Contestable Concept of Validity
75(2)
III Rule of Law
77(8)
PART II THE ECHR CONSTITUTION
5 The Argument of Constitutionalism
85(9)
I Constitutionalism in the International Realm
85(5)
II Cosmopolitan Constitutionalism
90(1)
III Deliberative or Discursive Constitutionalism
91(3)
6 The Constitutional Nature of the ECHR
94(8)
I The Constitutional Status of the ECHR's Judicial Review Mechanism
95(4)
II Locating the ECHR in the International Constitutionalism Debate
99(3)
7 Three Basic Constitutional Principles of the ECHR
102(17)
I The Three Pillars of the Council of Europe as Constitutional Principles
103(9)
A Rule of Law
104(3)
B Democracy
107(4)
C Human Rights
111(1)
II The Ideal and Real Dimension in the ECHR
112(1)
III Time Dimension of Interpretation and the Dual Nature of the ECHR
113(6)
PART III BALANCED LEGITIMACY MODEL
8 Setting the Scene for Balancing at the Interpretation Stage
119(10)
I The Distinction between Rules and Principles
119(2)
II Connecting Static and Evolutive Interpretation to Formal and Material Principles
121(1)
III Balancing in the Different Stages of Law Application
122(2)
IV Balancing of Interpretive Canons
124(5)
A Alexy's Model of a Preference Relation for Canons
124(1)
B Klatt's `Balancing-dependent Subsumption'
125(1)
C Wroblewski's `Second-level Directive of Interpretation'
126(2)
D Interim Conclusions
128(1)
9 The Balancing Model for Evolutive and Static Interpretation
129(10)
I Basic Ideas on the Balancing Model
129(2)
II Critical Aspects of Balancing in Human Rights Interpretation
131(2)
III Internal Structure of the Balancing Model
133(3)
IV Weight Formula
136(3)
10 External Justification
139(16)
I How to Accord Weights in the ECHR?
140(2)
II Weighting Rules in the Time Dimension of Interpretation
142(7)
A Weighting Factors for the Intensity of the Interference With Static Principles
142(2)
B Weighting Factors for the Importance of Evolutive Principles
144(4)
C The Weight of Consensus
148(1)
III The Epistemic Reliability of the Underlying Premises
149(6)
PART IV THE BALANCED LEGITIMACY MODEL APPLIED
11 The Right to Divorce
155(10)
I Facts of the Case
155(1)
II Time Dimension of Interpretation
156(1)
III The ECtHR's Reasoning
157(1)
IV The Balancing of Static and Evolutive Interpretation
158(6)
V The Legitimacy of the Evolutive Approach to Interpretation
164(1)
12 The Right to Assisted Suicide
165(8)
I Facts of the Case
165(1)
II Time Dimension of Interpretation
166(1)
III The ECtHR's Reasoning
167(2)
IV The Balancing of Static and Evolutive Interpretation
169(3)
V The Legitimacy of the Static Approach to Interpretation
172(1)
13 The Right to Preservation of the Environment
173(9)
I Facts of the Case
173(2)
II Time Dimension of Interpretation
175(2)
III The ECtHR's Reasoning
177(1)
IV The Balancing of Static and Evolutive Interpretation
178(3)
V A Stalemate Case
181(1)
Conclusion 182(3)
Bibliography 185(8)
Index 193
Lisa Sonnleitner is Lecturer of Jurisprudence at Karl-Franzens University Graz, Austria.