After a wonderful conference
in snowy Iceland, I am back in Utrecht with an update of relevant new ECHR-related
literature. The newest few issues of the European Human Rights Law Review
include a number of articles on the ECHR. In no. 6 of 2013:
* J.
Polakiewicz, ‘EU law and the ECHR: will the European Union’s accession square
the circle?”, pp. 592-605.
* M. Rogan, ‘Prisoners and “other
status” under Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights’, by
pp. 615-623.
And in no. 1 of 2014:
* S. Skinner,
‘Deference, proportionality and the margin of appreciation in lethal force case
law under Article 2 ECHR’, pp. 32-38.
The Statute Law Review, vol. 35, no. 1 (2014) includes: F. de Londras,
‘Declarations of incompatibility under the ECHR Act 2003: a workable
transplant?’ pp. 50-65.
And, maybe an
unexpected outlet, the International journal for the semiotics of law, vol. 26,
no. 4 (2013) features: J. Brannan, ‘Coming
to terms with the supranational: translating for the European Court of Human
Rights’, pp. 909-925.
The Nordic Journal of International Law, vol. 83, no. 1 (2014) includes: A. Willems,
‘The European Court of Human Rights on the UN individual counter-terrorist
sanctions regime: safeguarding Convention rights and harmonising conflicting
norms in Nada v. Switzerland’, pp. 39–60)
The Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, vol. 3, no. 1 (2014): T. Moustafa,
‘Judging in God’s name: state power, secularism, and the politics of Islamic
law in Malaysia’, pp. 152-167.
The Review of Central and East European law, vol. 38, no. 3-4 (2013): F. van der
Vet, Transitional justice in Chechnya:
NGO political advocacy for implementing Chechen judgments of the European Court
of Human Rights, pp. 363–388.
The Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 33, no. 4 (2013) features: A. Sanders,’ Does Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights apply to disciplinary procedures in the workplace?’, pp. 791-819.
The
International journal of human rights:
* D. Golubovic ,
‘Freedom of association in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights’,
vol. 17, no. 7-8 (2013) pp. 758-771.
* I. Turner, ‘Positive
obligations and Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights: a defence
of the UK’s Human Rights Act 1998’, vol. 18, no. 1 (2014) pp. 94-114.
Finally, Luzius Wildhaber, Arnaldur Hjartason and Stephen Donnelly, have posed on SSRN an article published in HRLJ 33 (2013) pp. 248-263, entitled ‘No Consensus on Consensus’ on the notion of “European Consensus” in the Court’s case-law.
