Search Tips
Closing the gap in international human rights law: lessons from three regional human rights systems on legal standards and practices regarding violence against women 2015, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- The European Court of Human Rights was constituted in 1959. The judgements of the Court are transmitted to the Committee of Ministers, which is responsible for the supervision of their execution. The Court has stated that its role in promoting and protecting human rights is subsidiary and supervisory, as the main responsibility to protect human rights lies with the contracting States. Its decisions generally reflect the view that the Convention should be interpreted in a dynamic manner that takes into consideration commonly accepted standards in national laws of European States. In the absence of a European consensus, the national law is reflected through the application of a margin of appreciation doctrine, which allows for a measure of discretion in legislative, administrative or judicial action taken by States, thereby accommodating variations in State practices. This may result in the Court refraining from interpretative rulings that are too strict, in the light of the absence of moral and/or legal consensus across member States. The doctrine has been criticized for undermining the universal nature of human rights and introducing an unwarranted level of flexibility into the Convention. Proponents, on the other hand, hold that the doctrine recognizes the reality of the existence of differences in cultural and political standards in European States.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
Existing legal standards and practices regarding violence against women in three regional human rights systems and activities being undertaken by civil society regarding the normative gap in international human rights law 2015, para. 41
- Paragraph text
- The European Court of Human Rights was constituted in 1959. The judgements of the Court are transmitted to the Committee of Ministers, which is responsible for the supervision of their execution. The Court has stated that its role in promoting and protecting human rights is subsidiary and supervisory, given that the main responsibility to protect human rights lies with the contracting States. Its decisions generally reflect the view that the Convention should be interpreted in a dynamic manner that takes into consideration commonly accepted standards in national laws of European States. In the absence of a European consensus, the national law is reflected through the application of a margin of appreciation doctrine, which allows for a measure of discretion in legislative, administrative or judicial action taken by States, thereby accommodating variations in State practices. This may result in the Court refraining from interpretative rulings that are too strict, in the light of the absence of moral and/or legal consensus across member States. The doctrine has been criticized for undermining the universal nature of human rights and introducing an unwarranted level of flexibility into the Convention. Proponents, on the other hand, hold that the doctrine recognizes the reality of the existence of differences in cultural and political standards in European States.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
Gender-related killings of women 2012, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- It is argued that in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland crimes in the name of honour are rooted in cultural traditions, not religious beliefs, and that "the conflation of the concepts of culture and religion contributes to the misunderstanding of such crimes, particularly in the context of Islamophobia and the 'war on terror'". Similarly, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions noted that "a number of renowned Islamic leaders and scholars have publicly condemned this practice and clarified that it has no religious basis".
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Reparations to women who have been subjected to violence 2010, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- It is important to draw a distinction between reparation measures and other rehabilitation measures. Sometimes, especially when the emphasis is placed on rehabilitation services as measures of redress, the line that divides reparation measures for gross violations from social assistance, humanitarian intervention measures and general development-oriented policies gets blurred.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
4 shown of 4 entities