326:(1998) on the subject of sex-reassignment surgery, it was much less likely to find a violation because it considered that the state had a wide margin of appreciation on how to treat a given issue. In the early 2000s, the Court loosened its reliance on European consensus and began to consider a trend in member states' laws sufficient to find that present-day conditions had changed with regard to a particular issue according to the living instrument doctrine.
281:(1981), in which the court judged "as compared with the era when that legislation was enacted, there is now a better understanding, and in consequence, an increased tolerance of homosexual behaviour to the extent that it is no longer considered to be necessary or appropriate" to criminalize homosexuality. According to law scholar
423:
understanding of
Convention rights can also be considered a form of judicial activism which denies individuals the full exercise of their rights. According to Letsas, the living instrument doctrine is not activist because "contracting states have given the Court jurisdiction to protect whatever human
399:
Supporters of the doctrine note that it is not prohibited by the treaty itself to take an expansive and/or evolutive interpretation of the rights enumerated therein. Stefan Thiel argues that the living instrument doctrine is allowed both by the
Convention and relevant international law. Dutch judge
300:(2008) stated that the living instrument doctrine, in addition to being in light of present-day conditions, also meant interpretation "in accordance with developments in international law, so as to reflect the increasingly high standard being required in the area of the protection of human rights".
285:, these cases have a pattern: a case involving a moral issue comes to the Court, the Court notes the importance of the moral aspect in the member state, but also considers developments in other Council of Europe states. In most cases, this resulted in a violation of a Convention right being found.
412:, giving Strasbourg judges the liberty to find what they want to find in the interstices of Convention rights". Other critics argue that the state parties should only be bound by the original obligations as understood in 1950.
436:
preferences across the entire
Council of Europe area than within a particular state, and is justified in raising the threshold of human rights protection, despite the blowback it has received from certain rulings.
261:
rightly stressed, must be interpreted in the light of present-day conditions." It went on to say that the verdict was being made in the context of the outlawing of corporal punishment in other
European countries.
371:(2015). Because of the living instrument doctrine, the Court has ruled on the human rights implications of technologies that did not exist when the Convention was drafted, on issues such as
254:
450:
188:
1022:
The
European Convention on Human Rights and the Living instrument doctrine: an investigation into the Convention's constitutional nature and evolutive interpretation
294:(2005), the court stated that it "upholds individual rights as practical and effective, rather than theoretical and illusory protections". The judgement for
361:. In addition, with the proliferation of alternative family arrangements, the court has expanded its definition of family under Article 8, for example to
734:"How far can the European Court of Human Rights go in the fight against discrimination? Defining new standards in its nondiscrimination jurisprudence"
551:
Letsas, George (2013). "The ECHR as a living instrument: its meaning and legitimacy". In Føllesdal, Andreas; Peters, Birgit; Ulfstein, Geir (eds.).
1088:
1009:
990:
948:
868:
560:
446:
181:
1030:
Shachor-Landau, Chava (2015). "The
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), 1950, as a Living Instrument in the Twenty-First Century".
223:(1978), and has led both to different rulings on certain issues as well as evaluating the human rights implications of new technologies.
258:
214:
1051:
489:
Dzehtsiarou, Kanstantsin (2011). "European
Consensus and the Evolutive Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights".
797:
174:
904:
Mukherjee, Amrita (2004). "The ICCPR as a 'Living
Instrument': The Death Penalty as Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment".
232:
210:
322:
655:"Is the 'Living Instrument' Approach of the European Court of Human Rights Compatible with the ECHR and International Law?"
312:
in a certain interpretation of a
Convention obligation, it is closely related to the Convention interpretation concepts of
1083:
157:
147:
250:
851:
Grover, Sonja C. (2020). "Judicial
Activism, the 'Living Instrument' Doctrine and the European Court of Human Rights".
296:
290:
367:
257:. The judgement stated that "The Court must also recall that the Convention is a living instrument which, as the
968:
Byron, Christine (2016). "The European Court of Human Rights: A Living Instrument as Applied to Homosexuality".
277:
52:
237:
219:
206:
47:
33:
603:
346:
317:
132:
983:
The Legitimacy of Family Rights in Strasbourg Case Law: 'Living Instrument' or Extinguished Sovereignty?
309:
272:
468:
98:
462:
313:
126:
94:
553:
Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a National, European and Global Context
921:
874:
828:
506:
354:
334:
142:
122:
68:
1047:
1005:
986:
944:
864:
820:
778:
556:
409:
384:
267:
78:
1039:
913:
856:
812:
745:
666:
533:
498:
376:
362:
320:. In cases where the Court did not find a European consensus on a particular issue, such as
111:
1067:
330:
162:
117:
654:
766:
358:
1077:
925:
878:
510:
380:
372:
282:
152:
73:
832:
329:
Areas in which the court considers that present-day conditions have evolved include
433:
405:
401:
816:
17:
917:
860:
416:
246:
107:
1043:
767:"Judicial Activism in the European Court of Justice – The Case of LGBT Rights"
502:
420:
265:
Other early cases which helped develop the living instrument doctrine include
137:
782:
537:
524:
Mowbray, A. (2005). "The Creativity of the European Court of Human Rights".
388:
350:
342:
338:
271:(1979), in which the court decided that it was no longer justified to treat
824:
798:"The Case for Same-Sex Marriage Before the European Court of Human Rights"
750:
733:
217:
in light of present-day conditions. The doctrine was first articulated in
432:
people have". Accordingly, the Court should not give any more weight to
853:
Judicial Activism and the Democratic Rule of Law: Selected Case Studies
428:
have, and not what human rights domestic authorities or public opinion
231:
The living instrument doctrine has been used from the beginning by the
1020:
670:
308:
Because the living instrument doctrine prioritizes whether there is a
1002:
A Theory of Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights
345:
are treated by the Court. The Court has given increased scrutiny to
1070:: The European Convention on Human Rights: living instrument at 70
604:"Background paper: The Convention as a Living Instrument at 70"
404:
stated in a speech that the living instrument doctrine is "a
941:
Making the Charter of Fundamental Rights a Living Instrument
245:
the court rejected the argument that because people in the
471: – Canadian doctrine of constitutional interpretation
445:
The living instrument doctrine has also been used by the
855:. Springer International Publishing. pp. 191–231.
576:
574:
572:
255:
Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights
451:
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
357:, which it is now more likely to label unjustified
555:. Cambridge University Press. pp. 106–141.
765:de Waele, Henri; Vleuten, Anna van der (2011).
465:, similar doctrine in U.S. constitutional law
182:
27:European Court of Human Rights interpretation
8:
738:International Journal of Constitutional Law
235:. It was first articulated during the case
449:and has been proposed with regards to the
189:
175:
29:
846:
844:
842:
749:
597:
595:
593:
591:
589:
1025:(PhD thesis). University of Southampton.
415:Sonja Grover argues that insisting on a
771:Michigan State International Law Review
648:
646:
644:
481:
337:. Letsas also finds differences in how
86:
60:
39:
32:
891:
719:
707:
695:
683:
635:
623:
580:
323:Sheffield and Horsham v United Kingdom
447:United Nations Human Rights Committee
341:, sexual advice for adolescents, and
7:
253:, such could not be a violation of
215:European Convention on Human Rights
602:ECHR registrar (31 January 2020).
87:General theories of interpretation
25:
1068:31 January 2020 official dialogue
939:Palmisano, Giuseppe, ed. (2015).
333:, environmental regulation, and
291:Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey
1032:Israel Yearbook on Human Rights
61:General rules of interpretation
1089:European Court of Human Rights
233:European Court of Human Rights
211:European Court of Human Rights
1:
817:10.1080/00918369.2017.1380991
148:Common good constitutionalism
48:Constitutional interpretation
251:judicial corporal punishment
1004:. Oxford University Press.
918:10.1350/jcla.68.6.507.54143
906:The Journal of Criminal Law
861:10.1007/978-3-030-35085-7_4
353:, gender, religion, or
297:Demir and Baykara v. Turkey
1105:
796:Hamilton, Frances (2018).
209:developed and used by the
203:living instrument doctrine
1044:10.1163/9789004308091_010
985:. Bloomsbury Publishing.
981:Draghici, Carmen (2017).
503:10.1017/S2071832200017533
368:Oliari and Others v Italy
805:Journal of Homosexuality
278:Dudgeon v United Kingdom
53:Statutory interpretation
1019:Webber, Thomas (2016).
1000:Letsas, George (2007).
526:Human Rights Law Review
238:Tyrer v. United Kingdom
220:Tyrer v. United Kingdom
207:judicial interpretation
34:Judicial interpretation
653:Theil, Stefan (2017).
349:exclusively based on
347:differential treatment
318:margin of appreciation
227:Origin and development
133:Strict constructionism
538:10.1093/hrlrev/ngi003
273:illegitimate children
1084:Legal interpretation
943:. Hotei Publishing.
469:Living tree doctrine
419:and/or conservative
894:, pp. 122–123.
751:10.1093/icon/mor044
732:Danisi, C. (2011).
710:, pp. 115–116.
686:, pp. 112–113.
659:European Public Law
626:, pp. 110–111.
463:Living Constitution
314:autonomous concepts
127:legislative history
95:Living Constitution
491:German Law Journal
355:sexual orientation
335:transgender rights
310:European consensus
143:Purposive approach
123:legislative intent
69:Plain meaning rule
1011:978-0-19-920343-7
992:978-1-5099-0526-3
950:978-90-04-29185-0
870:978-3-030-35085-7
811:(12): 1582–1606.
671:10.17863/CAM.8478
611:Council of Europe
562:978-1-107-02444-1
497:(10): 1730–1745.
410:judicial activism
385:mass surveillance
275:differently, and
268:Marckx v. Belgium
213:to interpret the
199:
198:
103:Living instrument
18:Living instrument
16:(Redirected from
1096:
1057:
1026:
1015:
996:
977:
955:
954:
936:
930:
929:
901:
895:
889:
883:
882:
848:
837:
836:
802:
793:
787:
786:
762:
756:
755:
753:
744:(3–4): 793–807.
729:
723:
717:
711:
705:
699:
693:
687:
681:
675:
674:
650:
639:
633:
627:
621:
615:
614:
608:
599:
584:
578:
567:
566:
548:
542:
541:
521:
515:
514:
486:
377:internet freedom
363:same-sex couples
191:
184:
177:
112:original meaning
30:
21:
1104:
1103:
1099:
1098:
1097:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1074:
1073:
1064:
1054:
1029:
1018:
1012:
999:
993:
980:
970:Judges' Journal
967:
964:
962:Further reading
959:
958:
951:
938:
937:
933:
903:
902:
898:
890:
886:
871:
850:
849:
840:
800:
795:
794:
790:
764:
763:
759:
731:
730:
726:
718:
714:
706:
702:
694:
690:
682:
678:
652:
651:
642:
634:
630:
622:
618:
606:
601:
600:
587:
579:
570:
563:
550:
549:
545:
523:
522:
518:
488:
487:
483:
478:
459:
443:
397:
331:gender equality
306:
229:
205:is a method of
195:
163:Legal formalism
120:
118:Original intent
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1102:
1100:
1092:
1091:
1086:
1076:
1075:
1072:
1071:
1063:
1062:External links
1060:
1059:
1058:
1052:
1027:
1016:
1010:
997:
991:
978:
963:
960:
957:
956:
949:
931:
912:(6): 507–519.
896:
884:
869:
838:
788:
757:
724:
722:, p. 113.
712:
700:
698:, p. 115.
688:
676:
665:(3): 587–614.
640:
638:, p. 112.
628:
616:
585:
583:, p. 109.
568:
561:
543:
516:
480:
479:
477:
474:
473:
472:
466:
458:
455:
442:
439:
424:rights people
396:
393:
359:discrimination
305:
302:
228:
225:
197:
196:
194:
193:
186:
179:
171:
168:
167:
166:
165:
160:
155:
150:
145:
140:
135:
130:
115:
105:
89:
88:
84:
83:
82:
81:
76:
71:
63:
62:
58:
57:
56:
55:
50:
42:
41:
37:
36:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1101:
1090:
1087:
1085:
1082:
1081:
1079:
1069:
1066:
1065:
1061:
1055:
1053:9789004308091
1049:
1045:
1041:
1037:
1033:
1028:
1024:
1023:
1017:
1013:
1007:
1003:
998:
994:
988:
984:
979:
975:
971:
966:
965:
961:
952:
946:
942:
935:
932:
927:
923:
919:
915:
911:
907:
900:
897:
893:
888:
885:
880:
876:
872:
866:
862:
858:
854:
847:
845:
843:
839:
834:
830:
826:
822:
818:
814:
810:
806:
799:
792:
789:
784:
780:
776:
772:
768:
761:
758:
752:
747:
743:
739:
735:
728:
725:
721:
716:
713:
709:
704:
701:
697:
692:
689:
685:
680:
677:
672:
668:
664:
660:
656:
649:
647:
645:
641:
637:
632:
629:
625:
620:
617:
612:
605:
598:
596:
594:
592:
590:
586:
582:
577:
575:
573:
569:
564:
558:
554:
547:
544:
539:
535:
531:
527:
520:
517:
512:
508:
504:
500:
496:
492:
485:
482:
475:
470:
467:
464:
461:
460:
456:
454:
452:
448:
440:
438:
435:
431:
427:
422:
418:
413:
411:
407:
403:
394:
392:
390:
386:
382:
381:personal data
378:
374:
373:biotechnology
370:
369:
364:
360:
356:
352:
348:
344:
340:
336:
332:
327:
325:
324:
319:
315:
311:
303:
301:
299:
298:
293:
292:
286:
284:
283:George Letsas
280:
279:
274:
270:
269:
263:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
240:
239:
234:
226:
224:
222:
221:
216:
212:
208:
204:
192:
187:
185:
180:
178:
173:
172:
170:
169:
164:
161:
159:
158:Legal process
156:
154:
153:Legal realism
151:
149:
146:
144:
141:
139:
136:
134:
131:
128:
124:
119:
116:
113:
109:
106:
104:
100:
96:
93:
92:
91:
90:
85:
80:
77:
75:
74:Mischief rule
72:
70:
67:
66:
65:
64:
59:
54:
51:
49:
46:
45:
44:
43:
38:
35:
31:
19:
1035:
1031:
1021:
1001:
982:
973:
969:
940:
934:
909:
905:
899:
887:
852:
808:
804:
791:
774:
770:
760:
741:
737:
727:
715:
703:
691:
679:
662:
658:
631:
619:
610:
552:
546:
532:(1): 57–79.
529:
525:
519:
494:
490:
484:
444:
434:majoritarian
429:
425:
414:
406:Trojan horse
402:Marc Bossuyt
398:
366:
328:
321:
307:
295:
289:
287:
276:
266:
264:
249:approved of
242:
236:
230:
218:
202:
200:
102:
1038:: 169–189.
892:Letsas 2013
777:(3): 639–.
720:Letsas 2013
708:Letsas 2013
696:Letsas 2013
684:Letsas 2013
636:Letsas 2013
624:Letsas 2013
581:Letsas 2013
417:originalist
247:Isle of Man
241:(1978). In
108:Originalism
99:Living tree
79:Golden rule
1078:Categories
476:References
441:Other uses
421:textualist
259:Commission
138:Textualism
926:145063267
879:213555077
783:2328-3068
511:145622218
395:Reception
389:surrogacy
351:ethnicity
343:obscenity
339:blasphemy
976:: 36–39.
833:27052577
825:28949813
457:See also
365:, as in
426:in fact
304:Effects
1050:
1008:
989:
947:
924:
877:
867:
831:
823:
781:
559:
509:
387:, and
922:S2CID
875:S2CID
829:S2CID
801:(PDF)
607:(PDF)
507:S2CID
430:think
243:Tyrer
40:Forms
1048:ISBN
1006:ISBN
987:ISBN
945:ISBN
865:ISBN
821:PMID
779:ISSN
557:ISBN
408:for
316:and
201:The
1040:doi
914:doi
857:doi
813:doi
746:doi
667:doi
534:doi
499:doi
288:In
1080::
1046:.
1036:45
1034:.
974:55
972:.
920:.
910:68
908:.
873:.
863:.
841:^
827:.
819:.
809:65
807:.
803:.
775:19
773:.
769:.
740:.
736:.
663:23
661:.
657:.
643:^
609:.
588:^
571:^
528:.
505:.
495:12
493:.
453:.
391:.
383:,
379:,
375:,
125:,
101:/
97:/
1056:.
1042::
1014:.
995:.
953:.
928:.
916::
881:.
859::
835:.
815::
785:.
754:.
748::
742:9
673:.
669::
613:.
565:.
540:.
536::
530:5
513:.
501::
190:e
183:t
176:v
129:)
121:(
114:)
110:(
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.