What is an 'absolute right'? Deciphering Absoluteness in the Context of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Mavronicola, Natasa

doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngs020

Cited by 86 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…36 See e.g. recently Mavronicola (2012) on Article 3 ECHR or Young (2008) and Müller (2009) on coreobligations under the ICESCR. also the fact that the ECtHR is dealing with similar questions of how to deal with such obligations from the perspective of practical burden sharing in following through on its interpretations.…”

Section: Discussion On the Un Guiding Principles On Extreme Poverty And Human Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sharing International Responsibility for Poor Migrants?

Hesselman¹

2013

European Journal of Social Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyses possible legal bases for the establishment of extra-territorial socio-economic human rights obligations on the part of wealthier European ‘Destination Countries' vis-à-vis poor migrants. In particular, it considers whether obligations of international cooperation and assistance under the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) might provide a basis for addressing socio-economic deprivation in Countries of Origin and lead to the provision of social assistance. The article also analyses the socio-economic case-law under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in respect of expulsion of migrants (e.g. MSS v Belgium and Greece, Sufi and Elmi v the UK, and SHH v the UK). The analysis of these documents supports the claim that wealthy states can attract responsibilities for providing protection against living in poverty for persons in other countries. At the same time, although language and semantics relating to extra-territorial socio-economic protection are converging under the ICESCR and ECHR, there are a number of pertinent questions that remain in the sphere of concrete burden sharing. These relate primarily to the allocation to wealthy European states of concrete burdens of responsibility for the elimination/prevention of poverty in other countries and raise the question of how far the responsibility stretches.

show abstract

Section: Discussion On the Un Guiding Principles On Extreme Poverty And Human Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sharing International Responsibility for Poor Migrants?

Hesselman¹

2013

European Journal of Social Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Klјučni član Konvencije čija primjena dolazi u obzir, u ovakvim slučajevima, jeste član 3 Konvencije kojim se garantuje da niko neće biti podvrgnut mučenju, nečovječnom ili ponižavajućem postupanju ili kazni. Ovaj član predstavlјa apsolutnu zabranu mučenja, nečovječnog ili ponižavajućeg postupanja (više o tome Mavronicola, 2012). Povodom problema u vezi sa migrantima, može doći do različitih vidova kršenja ovog člana.…”

Section: Povrede Zabrane Mučenja Nečovječnog Ili Ponižavajućeg Postupanja (čLan 3 Konvencije)unclassified

Položaj Mediteranskih Migranata: Uvertira Za Rackete I Drugi Protiv Italije

Turanjanin¹

2020

APDN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Autor u radu razmatra pitanje položaja migranata prema stavovima Evropskog suda za ljudska prava. Uzimajući u obzir posljednju deceniju mogli bismo reći da je ista prevashodno obilježena talasima migracija sa istoka koje ne jenjavaju, nego se samo transformišu u zavisnosti od otvorenih ruta. Jedan od puteva migranata ka Zapadnoj Evropi predstavlja Mediteran, a država koja je najviše izložena ovom talasu je Italija. Juna mjeseca 2019. godine otvoren je novi predmet ove države, a u vezi sa odnosom prema migrantima koji stignu putem mora. Stoga, autor u radu analizira dosadašnje stavove Evropskog suda za ljudska prava, izražene prevashodno kroz presudu Hirsi Jamaa i drugi protiv Italije, ne zapostavljajući druge presude u kojima je ovaj sud zauzeo stav i dao smjernice za odnos prema migrantima.

show abstract

“…Unlike Article 8, Article 3 ECHR protects an absolute right. 57 It must be upheld even "in times of war or other public emergency threatening the life of a nation". 58 No margin of appreciation applies, and States cannot justify any limitations or restrictions of rights falling under this Article.…”

Section: Article 3 Of the European Convention On Human Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Abortion in Northern Ireland and the European Convention on Human Rights: Reflections From the Uk Supreme Court

Ghráinne

McMahon

2019

ICLQ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On 7 June 2018, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (UKSCt) issued its decision on, inter alia, whether Northern Ireland's near-total abortion ban was compatible with the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). This article critically assesses the UKSC's treatment of international law in this case. It argues that the UKSCt was justified in finding that Northern Ireland's ban on abortion in cases of rape, incest, and FFA was a violation of Article 8, but that the majority erred in its assessment of Article 3 ECHR and of the relevance of international law more generally.

show abstract

What is an 'absolute right'? Deciphering Absoluteness in the Context of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by 86 publications

References 2 publications

Sharing International Responsibility for Poor Migrants?

Sharing International Responsibility for Poor Migrants?

Položaj Mediteranskih Migranata: Uvertira Za Rackete I Drugi Protiv Italije

Abortion in Northern Ireland and the European Convention on Human Rights: Reflections From the Uk Supreme Court

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About