Third-party interventions before the European Court of Human Rights : amicus curiae, member-state and third-party interventions
著者
書誌事項
Third-party interventions before the European Court of Human Rights : amicus curiae, member-state and third-party interventions
Intersentia, c2017
- タイトル別名
-
Third-party interventions before the ECtHR
大学図書館所蔵 全1件
  青森
  岩手
  宮城
  秋田
  山形
  福島
  茨城
  栃木
  群馬
  埼玉
  千葉
  東京
  神奈川
  新潟
  富山
  石川
  福井
  山梨
  長野
  岐阜
  静岡
  愛知
  三重
  滋賀
  京都
  大阪
  兵庫
  奈良
  和歌山
  鳥取
  島根
  岡山
  広島
  山口
  徳島
  香川
  愛媛
  高知
  福岡
  佐賀
  長崎
  熊本
  大分
  宮崎
  鹿児島
  沖縄
  韓国
  中国
  タイ
  イギリス
  ドイツ
  スイス
  フランス
  ベルギー
  オランダ
  スウェーデン
  ノルウェー
  アメリカ
注記
Includes bibliographical references (p. 195-209) and index
内容説明・目次
内容説明
Over the past decades the European Court of Human Rights has been increasingly engaged in constitutional decision-making. In this time the Court has decided whether abortion, assisted suicide, and surrogate motherhood are human rights. The Court's judgments therefore do not just affect the parties to a particular case, but individuals, other member states, and often European society at large. Unsurprisingly, a variety of entities such as non-governmental organisations, try to participate in the Court's proceedings as third-party interveners. Acknowledging a certain public interest in its decision-making, the Court accepted the first intervention in 1979. Since that time, interventions by individuals, member states and non-governmental organisations have increased. Yet despite this long-standing practice, third-party interventions have never been fully theorised. Third-Party Interventions before the European Court of Human Rights is the first comprehensive and empirical study on third-party interventions before an international court.Analysing all cases between 1979 and 2016 to which an intervention was made the book explores their potential influence on the reasoning and decision-making of the Court.
It further argues that there are three different type of intervention playing different roles in the administration of justice: amicus curiae interventions by organisations with a virtual interest in the case which strengthen the Court's legitimacy in its democratic environment; member state interventions reinforcing state sovereignty; and actual third-party interventions by individuals who are involved in the facts of a case and who are protecting their own legal interests. As a consequence, the book makes a plea for applying distinct admissibility criteria to the different type of interventions as well as a more transparent procedure when accepting and denying interventions.
目次
Acknowledgements - v
Table of Cases with Interventions - xiii
List of Abbreviations - xlix
Chapter 1. Introduction - 1
1. Context and Scope of the Study - 1
2. Method - 2
3. Basic Legal Framework - 4
3.1. Historical Background - 4
3.2. Ratione Personae - 5
3.2.1. Amicus Curiae Intervention - 6
3.2.2. Member-State Intervention - 9
3.2.3. Third-Party Intervention - 9
3.3. Ratione Materiae - 10
3.4. Ratione Temporis - 10
3.5. Form - 11
3.5.1. Written Comments - 11
3.5.2. Oral Comments - 11
3.6. The Court’s Engagement with Interventions - 12
3.6.1. Summary in Judgments - 12
3.6.2. Reference in Reasoning - 13
3.6.3. Reference in Separate Opinions - 15
Chapter 2. Amicus Curiae Intervention - 17
1. Introduction - 17
2. Historical Origin - 19
3. Rationale of Amicus Curiae - 20
4. The Court’s Legitimacy - 22
4.1. Tension between Democracy and Judicial Review - 22
4.1.1. Counter-Majoritarian Difficulty - 24
4.1.2. Quasi-Constitutional Function - 26
4.2. Constitutional Features - 29
5. Argumentative Representation - 30
5.1. Ideological Submissions - 31
5.1.1. Restraint Amicus Curiae Interventions - 33
5.1.1.1. Faith-based NGOs - 33
5.1.1.2. Churches - 35
5.1.2. Activist Amicus Curiae Interventions - 35
5.1.3. Beginning and Ending of Life - 38
5.1.4. Rights of LGBT People - 40
5.1.5. Relation between Religion and the State - 41
5.1.6. Influence on Ideological Directions of Cases - 44
5.2. Knowledge Production - 46
5.2.1. Information on International Law - 47
5.2.1.1. International Human Rights Law - 49
5.2.1.2. European Union Law - 50
5.2.1.3. International Humanitarian Law - 51
5.2.1.4. Preliminary Conclusion - 53
5.2.2. Contextualisation - 53
5.2.2.1. Factual Information - 54
5.2.2.2. Legal Information - 55
5.2.2.3. Situation in Northern Ireland - 56
5.2.2.4. Regime Changes in Central and Eastern Europe - 58
5.2.2.5. Preliminary Conclusion - 60
5.3. Lend Credibility to Arguments - 61
5.3.1. Membership-Based Organisations - 61
5.3.2. Authority - 63
5.4. Preliminary Conclusion - 65
6. Principled Decision-Making - 65
6.1. Proportionality - 66
6.1.1. Proportionality in the European Court’s Judgments - 67
6.1.2. Proportionality in the Narrow Sense - 68
6.1.2.1. Intensity - 69
6.1.2.2. Importance - 72
6.1.2.3. Justification - 73
6.1.3. Preliminary Conclusion - 74
6.2. Consensus and Comparative Reference - 75
6.2.1. Absence of Established Case Law - 76
6.2.2. Social or Political Development - 79
6.2.3. Preliminary Conclusion - 81
6.3. Margin of Appreciation - 82
6.4. Precedent - 85
6.4.1. Endorsement - 86
6.4.2. Rejection - 87
6.4.3. Preliminary Conclusion - 90
6.5. Development of the Convention - 91
6.5.1. Rights of Detainees - 92
6.5.1.1. Extradition and Expulsion - 93
6.5.1.2. Enforced Disappearance and Secret Detention - 96
6.5.1.3. Preliminary Conclusion - 98
6.5.2. Rights of LGBT People - 99
6.5.2.1. Rights of Transsexuals - 100
6.5.2.2. Family Life and Marriage - 100
6.5.2.3. Adoption - 102
6.5.2.4. Preliminary Conclusion - 102
6.5.3. Rights of Roma and Travellers - 103
6.5.4. Preliminary Conclusion - 107
7. Acceptance of Court’s Authority - 108
7.1. Specific Support - 109
7.2. Diffuse Support - 112
7.2.1. Use of Amicus Curiae - 113
7.2.2. Transparent Procedure - 115
7.2.3. Arbitrary Refusals - 116
7.3. Preliminary Conclusion - 117
8. Admissibility of Amicus Curiae - 118
8.1. Admissibility Ratione Materiae - 118
8.1.1. The Interest of Proper Administration of Justice - 118
8.1.2. General Principles - 119
8.1.3. Practical Implications - 122
8.2. Admissibility Ratione Personae - 123
8.2.1. Non-Governmental Organisations - 123
8.2.1.1. European Organisations - 123
8.2.1.2. Non-European Organisations - 124
8.2.2. National Human Rights Institutions and Ombudspersons - 125
8.2.3. Individuals - 126
8.2.4. Members of Parliamentary Assemblies - 126
8.2.5. International Organisations - 127
8.2.6. Non-Member States - 127
8.3. Preliminary Conclusion - 127
9. Conclusion - 128
Chapter 3. Member-State Intervention - 131
1. Preliminary Observation - 131
2. Notion and Origin - 132
3. Reinforcement of State Sovereignty - 134
4. Judicial Restraint - 136
4.1. Margin of Appreciation - 138
4.2. Subsidiarity - 140
4.3. Historical Interpretation - 141
4.4. Reserved Domain - 142
4.4.1. Immigration and National Security - 143
4.4.2. Governmental Structure - 145
4.5. State Responsibility in Relation to Inter-Governmental Organisations - 147
4.6. Restraint Ideological Submissions - 150
5. The Court’s Engagement with Member-State Intervention - 152
5.1. Reflection in Judgments - 152
5.2. Weakening Established Case Law - 153
6. Conclusion - 154
Chapter 4. Actual Third-Party Intervention - 157
1. Preliminary Observation - 157
2. Origin and Notion - 158
3. Legal Interest - 161
3.1. Ratione Materiae - 161
3.1.1. Execution of Judgments - 162
3.1.1.1. Reopening of Domestic Proceedings - 163
3.1.1.2. Other Individual Measures - 165
3.1.2. Conflict of Rights - 166
3.1.2.1. Property - 166
3.1.2.2. Ancestry - 168
3.1.2.3. Abduction of Children - 169
3.1.2.4. Child Custody and Visiting Rights - 171
3.1.2.5. Employment - 171
3.1.2.6. Defamation and Privacy Invasion - 172
3.1.3. Preliminary Conclusion - 173
3.2. Ratione Personae - 173
3.2.1. Natural and Legal Persons - 174
3.2.2. State Entities and Intergovernmental Bodies - 175
3.3. Preliminary Conclusion - 177
4. The Court’s Practice - 177
5. Scope of Participation - 179
5.1. Right to Intervene - 179
5.2. Litigation Rights - 181
6. Conclusion - 182
Chapter 5. Conclusion - 183
1. Third-Party Intervention: One Term, Three Concepts - 183
1.1. Amicus Curiae: Strengthen the Court’s Legitimacy - 183
1.2. Member States: Reinforce State Sovereignty - 185
1.3. Actual Third Party: Protect Own Legal Interests - 185
2. Non-Transparent Procedure and Admissibility Criteria - 186
2.1. Amicus Curiae Intervention - 186
2.2. Third-Party Intervention - 187
3. Impact of Intervention - 188
3.1. Amicus Curiae Intervention - 189
3.2. Member-State Intervention - 192
3.3. Third-Party Intervention - 192
Bibliography - 195
Index - 211
「Nielsen BookData」 より