Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T02:46:38.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Anglo-Saxonizing Rights: Transnational Public Interest Litigation In Europe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Anna Dolidze
Anna Dolidze*
Affiliation:
Cornell Law School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
New Voices II: Internationalizing and Domesticating Law
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 105 , 2011 , pp. 439 - 442
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Lautsi v. Italy, App. No. 30814/06, para. 8 (Mar. 18, 2011), available at http://www.echr.coe.int/echr/resources/hudoc/lautsi_and_others_vitaly.pdf.

2 Considering that there is a slight difference in the terms, “third party intervention” and “amicus curiae” submission will be used synonymously for the purposes of these remarks only.

3 Arend, Anthony Clark, Legal Rules and International Society 8, 9 (1999)Google Scholar.

4 See Sally Engle Merry, Human Rights and Gender Violence: Translating International Law Into Local Justice (2005).

5 See Koh, Harold Hongju, Why do Nations Obey International Law? 106 Yale L.J. 2599 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Koh, Harold Hongju, How it International Human Rights Law Enforced? 74 Ind. L.J. 1397 (1999)Google Scholar.

6 See, e.g., Keller, Helen & Sweet, Alec Stone, The Reception of the Echr in National Legal Orders, in Europe of Rights: the Impact of the ECHR on National Legal Systems (Keller, Helen & Sweet, Alec Stone eds., 2008)Google Scholar (arguing that member states had incorporated the European Convention into their domestic legal systems, and indicating that the Court exerts influence on the national legal systems).

7 See, e.g., Law and Globalization from Below: Towards A Cosmopolitan Legality (Boaventura de Sousa Santos & Cesar A. Rodriguez-Garavito eds., 2006); Rajagopal, Balakrishnan, International Law from Below: Development, Social Movements and Third World Resistance 262 (2003)Google Scholar; Upendra Baxi, the Future of Human Rights (2008).

8 See, e.g., Heifer, Laurence R. & Slaughter, Anne-Marie, Toward a Theory of Effective Supranational Adjudication, 107 Yale L.J. 273 (1997)Google Scholar; Alter, Karen J., Do International Courts Enhance Compliance with International Law?, 25 Rev. Asian & Pac. Stud. 51 (2003)Google Scholar; Posner, Eric A. & Yoo, John, Judicial Independence in International Tribunals, 95 Calif. L. Rev. 1 (2005)Google Scholar; Martin Shapiro & Alec Stone Sweet, on Law, Politics and Judicialization (2002).

9 See, e.g., Shelton, Dinah, The Participation of Non-Governmental Organizations in International Judicial Proceedings, 88 Am. J. Int’l L. 678 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Zagorac, Dean, International Courts and Compliance Bodies: The Experience of Amnesty International, in Civil Society, International Courts and Compliance Bodies (Trêves, Tullio et al. eds., 2005)Google Scholar; Hampson, Françoise, Interventions par des tiers et le rôle des organizations nongouvernemen-tales devant la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, in La Tierce Intervention Devant La Cour Europeenne Des Droits De L’Homme Et En Droit Compare 123–40 (Decaux, Emmanuel & Pettiti, Christophe eds., 2008)Google Scholar.

10 Heifer, Laurence R., Redesigning the European Court of Human Rights: Embeddedness as a Deep Structural Principle of the European Convention, 19 Eur. J. Int’ L. 125-59, 125 (2008)Google Scholar.

11 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as Amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, ETS No. 194 (Nov. 4, 1950), available at http://www.echr.coe.intyNR/rdonlyres/D5CC24A7-DC13-4318-B457-5C9014916D7A/0/ENG_CONV.pdf [hereinafter European Convention].

12 Mahoney, Paul, Developments in the Procedure of the European Court of Human Rights: The Revised Rules of the Court, 3 Y.B. Eur. L., 127, 127 (1983 Google Scholar).

13 Steven Greer, The European Convention on Human Rights: Achievements, Problems and Prospects 37-38 (2006).

14 European Convention, supra note 11, art. 36(2).

15 ECOSOC Res. No. 1296 on Consultative Arrangements (May 23, 1968).

16 Letter from Mr. Thornberry (May 20, 1977), Annex II, Letter from the Registrar of the Court to Mr. Cedric Thornberry, Strasbourg (Mar. 25, 1977), Tyrer v. United Kingdom, 24 Eur. Ct. H. R. (ser. B) at 45.

17 Winterwerp v. Netherlands, App. No. 6301/73, para. 7 (Oct. 24, 1979).

18 Young, James & Webster v. United Kingdom, 44 Eur. Ct. H. R. (ser. A) at 8 (1981).

19 Mahoney, supra note 12, at 141.

20 Lingens v. Austria, App. No. 9815/82 (July 8, 1986).

21 Request to submit written comments by the International Press Institute (Rule 37.2 of the Rules of the Court) (May 21, 1985), Lingens v. Austria, 86 Eur. Ct. H. R. (ser. B) at 42 (1984-1986).

22 Id.