Sacrificing the Effectiveness of the European Convention on Human Rights on the Altar of the Effective Functioning of Peace Support Operations: A Critique of Behrami & Saramati and Al Jedda

in International Community Law Review
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?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

Abstract

The European Convention of Human Rights is unlikely to be an effective remedy for local individuals alleging human rights violations by European states participating in peace support operations abroad in the future. This conclusion is substantiated by analysing the restrictive and legally flawed stance taken by the European Court of Human Rights in the joint cases of Behrami and Saramati which had not only a precedential effect on this court's own jurisprudence but also on the case of Al Jedda v. UK Secretary of Defence before the UK House of Lords. Ultimately, the decisions in these cases may be understood by the choice to let the rationale of effective functioning of peace support operations prevail over the effectiveness of human rights protection of local individuals.

Sacrificing the Effectiveness of the European Convention on Human Rights on the Altar of the Effective Functioning of Peace Support Operations: A Critique of Behrami & Saramati and Al Jedda

in International Community Law Review

Sections

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 21 21 9
Full Text Views 56 56 31
PDF Downloads 9 9 4
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0