The Burgeoning Minority Rights Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights

Parental Consent and Children’s Rights in Europe: A Balancing Act

“…(Council of Europe, 1950, Article 14) In traditional Court jurisprudence, however, this article is not 'freestanding' and discrimination can only be pleaded in conjunction with another Convention right (Gilbert, 2002). 5 In D.H., as with the other two cases, this article was taken together with Article 2 of Protocol 1, the right to education (Council of Europe, 1952).…”

“…5 The Council of Europe promulgated Additional Protocol 12 in November 2000, which only came into force in April 2005, after the alleged violations in these cases took place. This Protocol grants a freestanding right not to be discriminated against(Gilbert, 2002). It is worth noting that several of Europe's most powerful states, including France and the UK, have not ratified the Protocol.…”

'Participation', 'Representation' and 'Autonomy' in the Lund Recommendations and their Reflections in the Supervision of the FCNM and Several Human Rights Conventions

“…203 Gradually, however, the European Court of Human Rights has developed certain lines of jurisprudence with considerable potential for minority protection purposes. 204 The Article, which is most relevant regarding participation in public life, is Article 3 of the first additional protocol to the ECHR. This Article demands States to have free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot.…”

DemocracyvHuman Rights? The Strasbourg Court and the Challenge of Power Sharing

“…Geoff Gilbert detected a 'burgeoning minority rights jurisprudence of the European Court'. 10 The minority-friendly case law unfolded against the backdrop of an evolutive interpretation of Article 14, widely known as the Convention's 'Cinderella provision'. Article 14 has no autonomous standing and can be invoked only if it falls within the ambit of another Convention provision.…”