The Disjunctive Structure of Positive Rights under the European Convention on Human Rights
In: Nordic Journal of International LawSearch for other papers by Vladislava Stoyanova in
Current site
Google Scholar
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has reiterated that states have discretion regarding what means to use to fulfil their positive obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Given the “wide range of possible measures” that could be taken to ensure compliance with positive rights, these rights have a disjunctive structure since an omission has no definitive counterpart. This article examines how the ECtHR deals with the disjunctive structure of positive rights and how it addresses alternative protective measures that could have been extended. In order to identify the main points of contention, I first draw on legal-theoretical literature that has grappled with the structure of positive rights. I then examine what the Court actually does when it adjudicates positive obligation cases under qualified and unqualified rights. I analyse how and why the review endorsed in the ECtHR’s judgments diverges from or converges with the theoretical model.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1054 | 153 | 17 |
| Full Text Views | 344 | 24 | 2 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 468 | 55 | 4 |
The Disjunctive Structure of Positive Rights under the European Convention on Human Rights
In: Nordic Journal of International LawSearch for other papers by Vladislava Stoyanova in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has reiterated that states have discretion regarding what means to use to fulfil their positive obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Given the “wide range of possible measures” that could be taken to ensure compliance with positive rights, these rights have a disjunctive structure since an omission has no definitive counterpart. This article examines how the ECtHR deals with the disjunctive structure of positive rights and how it addresses alternative protective measures that could have been extended. In order to identify the main points of contention, I first draw on legal-theoretical literature that has grappled with the structure of positive rights. I then examine what the Court actually does when it adjudicates positive obligation cases under qualified and unqualified rights. I analyse how and why the review endorsed in the ECtHR’s judgments diverges from or converges with the theoretical model.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1054 | 153 | 17 |
| Full Text Views | 344 | 24 | 2 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 468 | 55 | 4 |