The newest issue of the ECHR Law Review is out now (vol. 3, issue 3). The issue contains an editorial note, two guest editorials, a case report, a book review and research articles. The contributions discuss such topics as the judicial discretion of the European Court of Human Rights, the practice of national courts to request advisory opinions under Protocol 16 and utilitarianism, to name a few. This is the table of contents:
* Vassilis P Tzevelekos and Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou, ‘The Judicial Discretion of the European Court of Human Rights: The Years of Plenty, and the Lean Years’
* Françoise Tulkens, ‘Judicial Activism v Judicial Restraint: Practical Experience of This (False) Dilemma at the European Court of Human Rights’
* George Tsebelis, ‘What Determines the Judicial Discretion of the European Court of Human Rights?’
* Lize Glas and Jasper Krommendijk, ‘A Strasbourg Story of Swords and Shields: National Courts’ Motives to Request an Advisory Opinion from the ECtHR Under Protocol 16’
* Jeremy Letwin, ‘A Utilitarian Account of Article 3 ECHR’
* Sarah Ganty, ‘The Double-Edged ECtHR Lăcătuş Judgment on Criminalisation of Begging: Da Mihi Elimo Sinam Propter Amorem Dei’
* Paul Gragl, ‘Cedric Marti, Framing a Convention Community: Supranational Aspects of the European Convention on Human Rights’
