Hearsay and <scp>H</scp>uman <scp>R</scp>ights: <i><scp>A</scp>l‐<scp>K</scp>hawaja</i> in the <scp>G</scp>rand <scp>C</scp>hamber

Redmayne, Mike

doi:10.1111/j.1468-2230.2012.00927.x

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Mastering Evidence and Proof: A Tribute To Mike Redmaynementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The right to confrontation is another potent witches' brew of common law tradition, human rights law and deeper normative obscurity that attracted Redmayne's critical attentions (Redmayne, 2012a(Redmayne, , 2012b, and is the subject of Liz Heffernan's contribution to this Special Issue. Redmayne intervened in the debate shortly after the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights issued its eagerlyanticipated judgment in Al-Khawaja.1 Heffernan reviews the "Al-Khawaja saga' and brings it up to date with the Horncastle2 applicants ' recent,unsuccessful,visit to Strasbourg.3 Tensions between orthodox common law thinking about admissible hearsay and the notion of a procedural right to confront (whether articulated on the pattern of the US Sixth Amendment, or in the more equivocal language of ECHR Art 6(3)(d))4 are central to this discussion.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mastering evidence and proof: A tribute to Mike Redmayne

Roberts

Doak

2016

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Mastering Evidence and Proof: A Tribute To Mike Redmaynementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mastering evidence and proof: A tribute to Mike Redmayne

Roberts

Doak

2016

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“… 9. Al-Khawaja and Tahery v United Kingdom (2012) 54 EHRR 23. For commentary see Heffernan (2013); Redmayne (2012a). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Calibrating the right to confrontation

Heffernan

2016

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 'Confronting Confrontation', published in 2012, Professor Mike Redmayne elucidated a critique of the relatively strong confrontation rights embedded in the US constitutional and ECHR traditions. He argued in favour of an alternative, more narrow conceptualisation of confrontation as the positive right of an accused to cross-examine available witnesses. Drawing on some of the threads stitched in 'Confronting Confrontation', the present article explores the challenge of applying the ECHR confrontation right in common law courts. Particular emphasis is placed on the need within the Strasbourg doctrine to assess the potential significance of the evidence to the prosecution's case at trial.

show abstract

Uncertainty and international adjudication

Dyèvre

2018

Leiden Journal of International Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In deciding whether to rule against a state party, international courts regularly confront a compliance dilemma: declare the state in breach of the international regime but with the risk that it will defy the court’s authority; or defer to the state but at the price of acquiescing to an unjust or undesirable outcome. Specifically, international adjudicators must solve this dilemma in a context of uncertainty, that is, without knowing with exactitude whether or not the state will prefer complying with an adverse ruling over overt defiance. I use a simple strategic model to cast light on this aspect of the compliance dilemma. Building off from the model’s insights, I then discuss the practices, doctrinal tactics and institutional mechanisms apt to reduce uncertainty and minimize state defiance. I highlight, in particular, the advantages of defiance avoidance mechanisms that help create informational feedback loops like test-the-water dicta and double-tier review. I illustrate how these mechanisms have been deployed by two of the world’s most powerful international courts, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Finally, I consider the limitations of these mechanisms along with the possibility for other international dispute settlement bodies to replicate them.

show abstract

Hearsay and Human Rights: Al‐Khawaja in the Grand Chamber

Cited by 3 publications

References 11 publications

Mastering evidence and proof: A tribute to Mike Redmayne

Mastering evidence and proof: A tribute to Mike Redmayne

Calibrating the right to confrontation

Uncertainty and international adjudication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About