A Right Not to Be Left Alone – Utilising the Right to Private Life to Prevent Honour-related Violence

in Nordic Journal of International Law
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.



Have Institutional Access?

Login with your institution. Any other coaching guidance?


Honour-related violence is increasingly recognised as a human rights problem in a number of countries. However, the scope of State obligations to prevent such acts remains largely unexplored, with the exception of so-called honour killings. This article analyses other forms of honour-related violence from the perspective of the right to private life. It argues that a positive obligation to prevent honour-related violence arises under this right. The extent of the obligation is exemplified by demonstrating to which honour-related acts the right to private life is applicable and which measures authorities can be expected to take in order to prevent these acts.

  • 47

    De Schutter and Tulkenssupra note 31 pp. 199–200.

  • 55

    Van Buerensupra note 14 p. 761.

  • 57

    Van Buerensupra note 14 pp. 751–752.

  • 68

    For a parallel to rapesee e.g. X and Y v. the Netherlandssupra note 19 paras. 27 30 where the Court found that practical and effective protection through criminalisation was necessary when such fundamental values and essential aspects of private life were at stake.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 73

    Leachsupra note 69 p. 124. In addition the ECtHR at times uses the term ‘vulnerable persons’ to denote persons belonging to ‘vulnerable groups’ see e.g. Z and Others v. the United Kingdom 10 May 2001 no. 29392/95 para. 73; and Đorđević v. Croatiasupra note 30 para. 138.

  • 91

    V. Waisman‘Human Trafficking: State obligations to Protect Victims’ Rights, the Current Framework and a New Due Diligence Standard’Hastings International and Comparative Law Review (2010) p. 397.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 97

    Nowaksupra note 22 p. xxi.

  • 125

    On protection orderssee e.g. Opuz v. Turkeysupra note 34 para. 148. On detention see Fatma Yildirim v. Austriasupra note 111.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
Index Card
Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 57 50 1
Full Text Views 208 207 0
PDF Downloads 18 18 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0