Activism identification in law enforcement approaches of judges of the European Court of Human Rights

About the author:

Andrew Yu. Klyuchnikov, Cand. Sci. (Jur.), Associate Professor, Associate Professor, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (Lipetsk Branch); Judge, Lipetsk Pravoberezhniy District Court; andrew19871961@mail.ru

Abstract:

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is a unique institution not only in Europe, but in the whole world; it is by far the most effective among all the international human rights courts. Since its foundationing in 1959, it has dealt a huge number of decisions, becoming the most active participant in the international justice. The success of individual appeals, on which the entire Convention system is based, has inevitably led to the involvement of new areas of human rights in the subject of the court’s research, and has extended it to a new range of subjects. The Court’s systematic expansion of the area (borders) of the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the involvement of new areas in it due to the progressive nature of the practice, is a positive quality. The rich and diverse Strasbourg practice has changed the political and legal landscape of Europe. This has led to the ECHR becoming a victim of its own success, in some cases invading the sovereign powers of states and affecting their constitutional identity. Among practitioners and researchers of international justice issues, the voices about excessive activism of the Court started appearing more often.

The author of this article studies the factors that contribute to the manifestation of activist positions by judges of the ECHR, identifies forms of activism, and distinguishes them from judicial passivism. The material for the article includes the work of prominent researchers of international justice problems, judges of the ECHR, Russian authors, and the judicial practice of this supranational court. The author uses traditional research methods — general scientific and special, with an emphasis on the comparative legal method. The subject of the study is the author’s scientific concepts that reveal judicial activism through the case-law of the ECHR. The relevance of the work lies in the problem of using the practice of supranational courts in national justice, and the effective application of the developed standards.

References:

1. Belov S. A. 2018. “The constitutional model of legitimising decisions of the organs of international organisations”. Journal of Constitutional Justice, no. 2, pp. 1-10. [In Russian]

2. Ivanenko A. A. 2015. “Forms and limits of interpretative activity of the european court of human rights”. Siberian Law Review, no. 4 (29), pp. 17-21. [In Russian]

3. Klyuchnikov A. Yu. 2020. “On acceptance criteria for law-making decisions of the international court of justice”. International Criminal Law and International Justice, no. 1, pp. 8-11. [In Russian]

4. Klyuchnikov A. Yu. 2019. “On legitimacy of the European Court of Human Rights”. Russian Judge, no. 3, pp. 43-46. [In Russian]

5. Klyuchnikov A. Yu. 2019. “The main approaches to the definition of the international courts’ competence”. Tyumen State University Herald. Social, Economic, and Law Research, vol. 5, no. 3 (19), pp. 128-143. DOI: 10.21684/2411-7897-2019-5-3-128-143 [In Russian]

6. Kovalenko S. I. 2018. “The evolutionary approach of the European Court of Human Rights to the interpretation of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms: theoretical and legal grounds”. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 11: Pravo, no. 4, pp. 83-93. [In Russian]

7. Timoshina E. V. 2018. “Methodology of judicial interpretation: critical analysis of the realistic approach”. Proceedings of the Institute of State and Law of the RAS, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 72-102. [In Russian]

8. Chechulina A. A. 2019. “The living instrument of the european convention: continuation of the discussion”. Juridical Education and Science, no. 9, pp. 26-32. [In Russian]

9. de Blois M. 1994. “The Fundamental Freedom of the European Court of Human Rights”. In: The Dynamics of the Protection of Human Rights in Europe. Essays in Honour of G. Schermers. Vol. 3, pp. 41-48. Dordrecht; Boston; London.

10. Costa J. P. “The European Court of Human Rights and its recent case law”. Texas International Law Journal, no. 38, pp. 455-467.

11. Mahoney P. 1990. “Judicial activism and judicial self-restraint in the European Court of Human Rights: two sides of the same coin”. Human Rights Law Journal, no. 11, pp. 57-88.

12. Merrills J. G. 1995. The Development of International Law by the European Court of Human Rights. Manchester. 235 pp.