Children’s Rights in the European Court of Human Rights – An Emerging Power Structure

in The International Journal of Children's Rights
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.

Help

 

Have Institutional Access?

Login with your institution. Any other coaching guidance?

Connect

Legal research has shown mixed results regarding the application of a child-centred approach in judgments from the European Court of Human Rights. With an interdisciplinary perspective, however, a number of remarkable features become visible.

This article explores case law from the European system with a blended methodology. First, a quantitative assessment of the Court’s judgments over the last decade reveals, surprisingly, that the child’s best interests doctrine has become widely used only recently, despite the principle being invoked as early as 1988. Secondly, an in-depth discourse analysis of selected landmark cases shows how the child-centred approach, in certain types of case, has gained status as the paramount consideration to the extent that it may sideline competing principles in the balancing exercise of adjudication. In the conclusion, the two types of enquiries, the statistical and the qualitative scrutiny of judgments, are combined to offer an assessment of the power of children’s rights alongside other interests in the European human rights machinery.

Sections
References
  • Arai-TakahashiY.The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine and the Principle of Proportionality in the Jurisprudence of the echr (Oxford: Hart Publishing2002).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • ArceM. C.Maturing Children’s Rights Theory. From Children, With Children, Of Children”International Journal of Children’s Rights2015 (23(2)) 283331. DOI: .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • ArcherD. W.“Children’s Rights” in E. N. Zalta (ed.)The Stanford Encyclopeida of Philosophy (2002).

  • BrauchJ. A.The Margin of Appreciation and the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights: Threat to the Rule of Law”Columbia Journal of European Law2004 (11) 113150.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • BreenC.The Standard of the Best Interest of the Child. A Western Tradition in International and Comparative Law (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers2002).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • BruinsmaF.Judicial Identities in the European Court of Human Rights” in van HoekA.JansenO.HolT.RijpkemaP. and WiddershovenR. (eds.) Multilevel Governance in Enforcement and Adjudication (Antwerpen – Oxford: Intersentia2006).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • BuchT.International Child Law2nd edn. (Abingdon: Routledge2010).

  • ChristoffersenJ. and MadsenM. R. (eds.) The European Court of Human Rights between Law and Politics 2nd edn. (Oxford: Oxford University Press2013).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • CostaJ.-P.The Best Interest of the Child in the Recent Case Law of the European Court of Human RightsFranco-British-Irish Colloque on Family Law Dublin 14 May 2011 available at: https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/8722335/franco-british-irish-colloque-on-family-law.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • DetrickS.A Children’s rights bibliography based on the Convention on the Rights of the Child. A companion volume to the International Children’s Rights Thesaurus (Florence: unicef Innocenti Research Centre United Nations Children’s Fund 1997).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • DzehtsiarouK.European Consensus and the Evolutive Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights”German Law Journal2011 (12(10)) 17301745.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • FortinJ.Children’s Rights and the Developing Law3rd edn. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press2009).

  • FreemanM.Article 3. The Best Interest of the Child. A Commentary on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child” in AlenA. LanotteJ. V.VerhellenE.AngF.BerghamsE. andVerheydeM. (eds.) A Commentary on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Leiden: Martinus Nijhof Publishers2007).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • FreemanM.Human Rights – an Interdisciplinary Approach2nd edn. (Cambridge: Polity Press2011).

  • GreerS.The European Convention on Human Rights: Achievements Problems and Prospects (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press2006).

  • HansonK.‘killed by charity’ – Towards interdisciplinary child’s rights studies” Editorial Childhood2014 (21(4)).

  • HarrisD. O’Boyle M. BatesE. and BuckleyC.Law of the European Convention on Human Rights3rd edn. (Oxford: Oxford University Press2014).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • hcchOutline Hague Child Abduction Convention” issued by Hague Conference on Private International Law (2014) available at:http://www.hcch.net/upload/outline28e.pdf.

    • Export Citation
  • HoffmannS.-L. “ Genealogies of Human Rights” in HoffmannS.-L. (ed.) Human Rights in the Twentieth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press2011).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • HolzscheiterA.Children’s Rights in International Politics: The Transformative Power of Discourse (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan2010).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • ItzcovichG.One, None and One Thousand Margins of Appriciations: The Lautsi CaseHuman Rights Law Review2013 (13). DOI: 10.1093/hrlr/ngs038.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • JacobsF. G. and WhiteR.C.A.The European Convention on Human Rights2nd edn. (Oxford: Oxford University Press1996).

  • KellerH. and HeriC.Protecting the Best Interest of the Child: International Child Abduction and the European Court of Human Rights”Nordic Journal of International Law2015 (84 (2)) 270296.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • KilkellyU.Effective Protection of Children’s Rights in Family Cases: An International ApproachTransnational Law and Contemporary Problems2002 (12).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • KilkellyU.The crc in Litigation under the echr” in LiefaardT. and DoekJ. E. (eds.) Litigating the Rights of the Child (Dordrecht: Springer2014).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • KilkellyU.Article 8: The Right to Respect for Private and Family Life, Home and Correspondence” in D. Harris M. O’Boyle E. Bates and C. Buckley Law of the European Convention on Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press2009a).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • KilkellyU.Child Law and the echr: issues of Family Life, Adoption and Contact” in KilkellyU. (ed.) echr and Irish Law2nd edn. (Bristol: Jordans2009b).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • KilkellyU.The Child and the European Convention on Human Rights (London: Ashgate Publishers1999).

  • KratochvílJ.The Inflation of the Margin of Appreciation by the European Court of Human Rights”Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights2011 (29 (3)) 324357.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • LeggA.The Margin of Appreciation in International Human Rights Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press2012).

  • G.LetsasTwo Concepts of the Margin of AppreciationOxford Journal of Legal Studies2006 (26) 705732.

  • MorleyJ. D.The Hague Abduction Convention and Human Rights: A Critique of the Neulinger Case2011 available at: https://www.iaml.org/cms_media/files/the_hague_abduction_convention_and_human_rights_a_critique_of_the_neulinger_case_revised.pdf.

    • Export Citation
  • Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights “Legislative History of the Convention of the Rights of the Child” 2007 (1) New York and Geneva.

  • Peréz-VeraE.Explanatory Report on the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention1982 issued by Hague Conference on Private International Lawhttp://www.hcch.net/upload/expl28.pdf.

    • Export Citation
  • QuennerstedtA.Children’s Rights Research Moving into the Future – Challenges on the Way ForwardInternational Journal of Children’s Rights2013 (21) 233247.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • ReynaertD.Bouverne-de-BieM. and VandeveldeS.: “ A Review of Children’s Rights Literature Since the Adoption of the United Nation Conventon on the Rights of the Child”Childhood2009 (16) 518534.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • RusinedS.Contributions to the History of Concepts (ed.) available at: http://historyofconcepts.org/.

  • RaineyB.WicksE. and OveyC.Jacobs White & Ovey: The European Convention on Human Rights6th edn. (Oxford: Oxford University Press2014).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • SchuzR.The Hague Child Abduction Convention: A Critical Analysis (Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing2013).

  • SilbermanL. and LipmanM.A Brief Comment on the Neulinger and Shuruk versus Switzerland (2010), European court of Human Rights” in The Judges Newsletter on International Child Protection Vol. xviii The Hague Conference on Private International Law. 2012.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • SpielmannD.Allowing the Right Margin: The European Court of Human Rights and The National Margin of Appreciation Doctrine: Waiver or Subsidiarity of European Review?Cambridge Yearbook of European legal studies2011 (14 (1)) 381418.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • StalportH.Children and the European Union: Rights Welfare and Accountability(Oxford: Hart Publishing2012).

  • TobinJ.Courts and the Construction of Childhood: A New Way of Thinking” in FreemanMichael (ed.) Law and Childhood Studies: Current Legal Issues (Oxford: Oxford University Press2012).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Trombetta PanigadiF.The European Court of Human Rights and the Best Interest of the Child in Recent Case Law on International Child Abduction” in N. Boschiero et al. (eds.) International Courts and the Development of International Law: Essays in Honour of Tullio Treves (Asser 2013).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • WoolfM.Coming of Age? – The Principle of ‘The Best interest of the Child’” European Human Rights Law Review2003205221.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • “General guidelines regarding the form and content of initial reports to be submitted by States Parties under article 44 paragraphh 1(a) of the Convention” crc/C/5. 30/10/91 issued by the Committee on the Rights of the Child.

  • “General comment No. 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration (art. 3 para. 1)” crc/C/gc/14. 29 May 2013 issued by the Committee on the Rights of the Child.

  • “Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction” 25 October 1980 Hague Conference on Private International Law.

  • “Outline Hague Child Abduction Convention” May 2014 Hague Conference on Private International Law.

  • “Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure” A/res/66/138 New York 19 December 2011 issued by the United Nations.

  • Antwi and others v. Norway no. 26940/10 echr 2012.

  • C.A.S and C.S. v. Romania no. 26692/05 echr 2012.

  • Elholz v. Germany no. 25735/94 echr 2000 (Grand Chamber).

  • Jeunesse v. The Netherlands no. 12738/10 echr 2014 (Grand Chamber).

  • Maslov v. Australia no. 1638/03 echr 2008 (Grand Chamber).

  • Maumousseau and Washington v. France no. 39388/05 echr 2007.

  • Neulinger and Shuruk v Switzerland no. 41615/07 echr 2010 (Grand Chamber).

  • N.P. v. The Republic of Moldova no. 58455/13 echr 2015.

  • Nunez v. Norway no. 55597/09 echr 2011.

  • O’Keeffe v. Ireland no. 35810/09 echr 2014 (Grand Chamber).

  • Olsson v. Sweden (no. 1) no. 10465/83 echr 1988.

  • Paradiso and Campanella v. Italy no 25358/12 echr 2015.

  • Piechowicz v. Poland no. 20071/07 echr 2012.

  • Raban v. Romania no. 25437/08 echr 2010.

  • Šneersone and Kampanella v. Italy no. 14737/09 echr 2011.

  • Sommerfeld v. Germany no. 31871/96 echr 2001.

  • Sommerfeld v. Germany no. 31871/96 echr 2003 (Grand Chamber).

  • V.P. v. Russia no. 61362/12 echr 2015.

  • Vujica v. Croatia no. 56163/12 echr 2015.

  • X v. Latvia no. 27853/09 echr 2013 (Grand Chamber).

  • 2

    Greer 2006contends that the literature on this doctrine is more extensive than on any other principle of interpretation of the echr 223.

  • 6

    General comment No. 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration (art. 3 para. 1).

  • 28

    Costa J. 20114. A similar point of view can be seen in Trombetta Panigadi 2013 608. Also cf. X v. Latvia 2013 where the Grand Chamber states that a ‘harmonious interpretation’ of the Hague Convention and the echr can be achieved provided that the exception clauses of the Hague Convention be considered ‘genuinely’ para. 106.

Index Card
Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 188 181 10
Full Text Views 222 221 6
PDF Downloads 56 54 4
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0