Preview

Russian Law Journal

Advanced search

Applying the European Convention on Human Rights to the Conflict in Ukraine

https://doi.org/10.17589/2309-8678-2018-6-3-8-78

Full Text:

Abstract

The “annexation” of Crimea by the Russian Federation and the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine have resulted in widespread human rights abuses. Both Ukraine and the Russian Federation are signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights and the Convention should apply within the territory and to the conflict. However, recent applications to the European Court of Human Rights reveal a great deal of confusion over which State bears responsibility for protecting human rights in different parts of Ukraine. This article seeks to shine a light on this problem presenting a deep analysis of the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence and discussing how it applies to both the conflict in Eastern Ukraine and “annexed” Crimea. It addresses salient issues such as responsibility for the actions of non-state actors and armed groups in Eastern Ukraine and whether the legality of the “annexation” has any bearing on the human rights obligations of each State. The article presents a detailed critique of recent judgments from the European Court of Human Rights arguing that the jurisprudence of the Court has created a bewildering degree of complexity and uncertainty as to the obligations of each State and discussing the practical implications of this uncertainty.

About the Authors

Stuart Wallace
University of Cambridge
United Kingdom

Lecturer and Director of Studies in Law, Homerton College

K203 Cavendish Building, Homerton College, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 8PH, United Kingdom



Conall Mallory
Newcastle University
United Kingdom

Lecturer in Law, Newcastle Law School

21-24 Windsor Terrace, Newcastle University, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom



References

1. Abresch W. A Human Rights Law of Internal Armed Conflict: The European Court of Human Rights in Chechnya, 16(4) European Journal of International Law 741 (2005).

2. Allain J. Derogation from the European Convention of Human Rights in the Light of “Other Obligations Under International Law,” 5 European Human Rights Law Review 480 (2005).

3. Balendra N. Defining Armed Conflict, 29(6) Cardozo Law Review 2461 (2008).

4. Benvenisti E. The Origins of the Concept of Belligerent Occupation, 26(3) Law and History Review 621 (2008).

5. Besson S. The Extraterritoriality of the European Convention on Human Rights: Why Human Rights Depend on Jurisdiction and What Jurisdiction Amounts To, 25(4) Leiden Journal of International Law 857 (2012).

6. Bethlehem D. The Relationship Between International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law in Situations of Armed Conflict, 2(2) Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law 180 (2013).

7. Brownlie I. Principles of Public International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).

8. Carcano A. The Transformation of Occupied Territory in International Law (Leiden: Brill/Nijhoff, 2015).

9. Cassese A. The Nicaragua and Tadic Tests Revisited in Light of the ICJ Judgment on Genocide in Bosnia, 18(4) European Journal of International Law 649 (2007).

10. Copetti Cravo D. Ukraine Liability for Violation of Human Rights in the Downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17, 12 Brazilian Journal of International Law 728 (2015) (in Portuguese).

11. Corn G. Mixing Apples and Hand Grenades The Logical Limits of Applying Human Rights Norms to Armed Conflict, 1(1) Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies 52 (2010).

12. Costelloe D. Treaty Succession in Annexed Territory, 65(2) International & Comparative Law Quarterly 343 (2016).

13. Cowan A. A New Watershed? Re-evaluating Bankovic in Light of Al-Skeini, 1(1) Cambridge International Law Journal 213 (2012).

14. Crawford J. & Olleson S. The Nature and Forms of International Responsibility in International Law in International Law 441 (M.D. Evans (ed.), 3rd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010).

15. Crawford J. Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with Commentaries, 2 yearbook of the international Law Commission 1 (2001).

16. Cullen A. & Wheatley S. The Human Rights of Individuals in De Facto Regimes Under the European Convention on Human Rights, 13 human rights Law review 691 (2013).

17. Dennis M.J. Application of Human Rights Treaties Extraterritorially to Detention of Combatants and Security Internees: Fuzzy Thinking All Around, 12(2) ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law 459 (2006).

18. Doswald-Beck L. & Henckaerts J.-M. Customary International Humanitarian Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005).

19. Fitzpatrick J. Human Rights in Crisis: The International System for Protecting Human Rights During States of Emergency (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994).

20. Fox G.H. The Occupation of Iraq, 36 Georgetown Journal of International Law 195 (2004–2005).

21. Giacca G. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Armed Conflict (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).

22. Gibney M. The Downing of MH17: Russian Responsibility?, 15(1) Human Rights Law Review 169 (2015).

23. Gondek M. Extraterritorial Application of the European Convention on Human Rights: Territorial Focus in the Age of Globalization?, 52 Netherlands International Law Review 349 (2005).

24. Goodman R. The Power to Kill or Capture Enemy Combatants, 24(3) European Journal of International Law 819 (2013).

25. Grant T. Aggression Against Ukraine Territory, Responsibility, and International Law (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015).

26. Hakimi M. State Bystander Responsibility, 21(2) European Journal of International Law 341 (2010).

27. Hays Parks W. Part IX of the ICRC Direct Participation in Hostilities Study: No Mandate, No Expertise, and Legally Incorrect, 42 New York University Journal of international Law and Politics 769 (2010).

28. Kavaldjieva S. Jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights: Exorbitance in Reverse?, 37(3) Georgetown Journal of international Law 507 (2006).

29. Kirchner s. Interim Measures in Inter-State Proceedings Before the European Court of Human Rights: Ukraine v. Russia, 3(1) University of Baltimore Journal of International Law 33 (2015).

30. Koch J. The Efficacy and Impact of Interim Measures: Ukraine’s Inter-State Application Against Russia, 39(1) Boston College International and Comparative Law Review 163 (2016).

31. Kohen M.G. Secession: International Law Perspectives (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006).

32. Krieger H. A Conflict of Norms the Relationship Between Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law in the ICRC Customary Law Study, 11(2) Journal of Conflct & Security Law 265 (2006).

33. Larsen K.M. Territorial Non-Application of the European Convention on Human Rights, 78 Nordic Journal of International Law 73 (2009).

34. Lawson R. Really Out of Sight? Issues of Jurisdiction and Control in Situations of Armed Conflict under the ECHR in Margins of Conflict: The ECHR and Transitions to and from Armed Conflict 57 (A. Buyse (ed.), Antwerp: Intersentia, 2011).

35. Leach P. The Chechen Conflict: Analysing the Oversight of the European Court of Human Rights, 6 European Human Rights Law Review 732 (2008).

36. Loucaides L. Determining the Extra-Territorial Effect of the European Convention: Facts, Jurisprudence and the Bankovic Case, 4 European Human Rights Law Review 391 (2006).

37. Loucaides L. Is the European Court of Human Rights Still a Principled Court of Human Rights After the Demopoulos Case?, 24(2) Leiden Journal of International Law 435 (2011).

38. Lubell N. Human Rights Obligations in Military Occupation, 94(885) International Review of the Red Cross 317 (2012).

39. Lush C. The Territorial Application of the European Convention on Human Rights: Recent Case Law, 42(4) international & Comparative Law Quarterly 897 (1993).

40. Malanczuk P. Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law (7th ed., New York: Routledge, 1997).

41. Mastorodimos K. The Utility and Limits of International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law’s Parallel Applicability, 5 review of international Law and Politics 123 (2009).

42. McGoldrick D. Extraterritorial Application of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties 41 (F. Coomans & M.T. Kamminga (eds.), Antwerp: Intersentia, 2004).

43. Milano E. Unlawful Territorial Situations in International Law – Reconciling Effectiveness, Legality and Legitimacy (Leiden: Brill, 2005).

44. Milanovic M. & Papic T. As Bad as It Gets: The European Court of Human Rights’s “Behrami and Saramati” Decision and General International Law, 58(2) International & Comparative Law Quarterly 267 (2009).

45. Milanovic M. Al-Skeini and Al-Jedda in Strasbourg, 23(1) European Journal of International Law 121 (2012).

46. Milanovic M. Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties: Law, Principles, and Policy (Oxford: Oxford university Press, 2011).

47. Milanovic M. From Compromise to Principle: Clarifying the Concept of State Jurisdiction in Human Rights Treaties, 8 Human Rights Law Review 411 (2008).

48. Miltner B. Revisiting Extraterritoriality After Al-Skeini: The ECHR and Its Lessons, 33(4) Michigan Journal of International Law 693 (2012).

49. Modirzadeh N.K. The Dark Sides of Convergence: A Pro-Civilian Critique of the Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Law in Armed Conflict, 86 International Law Student Series US Naval War Collection 349 (2010).

50. Moor L. & Simpson B. Ghosts of Colonialism in the European Convention on Human Rights, 76(1) British Yearbook of International Law 121 (2005).

51. Norris R. & Reiton P. The Suspension of Guarantees: A Comparative Analysis of the American Convention on Human Rights and the Constitutions of the States Parties, 30 American University Law Review 189 (1980).

52. Oppenheim L. et al. Oppenheim’s International Law. Vol. 1: Peace. Parts 2–4 (Harlow: Longman, 1992).

53. Raible L. The Extraterritoriality of the ECHR: Why Jaloud and Pisari Should Be Read as Game Changers, 2 European Human Rights Law Review 161 (2016).

54. Roth B. The Neglected Virtues of Bright Lines: International Law in the 2014 Ukraine Crises, 21(2) ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law 317 (2014–2015).

55. Ryngaert C. Clarifying the Extraterritorial Application of the European Convention on Human Rights, 28(74) Utrecht Journal of international and European Law 57 (2012).

56. Sari A. Untangling Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction from International Responsibility in Jaloud V. Netherlands: Old Problem, New Solutions?, 53 Military Law and the Law of War Review 287 (2014).

57. Schabas W. Synergy or Fragmentation? International Criminal Law and the European Convention on Human Rights, 9(3) Journal of International Criminal Justice 609 (2011).

58. Scobbie I. Principle of Pragmatics– The Relationship Between Human Rights Law and the Law of Armed Conflict, 14(3) Journal of Conflict and Security Law 449 (2009).

59. Shany Y. Taking Universality Seriously: A Functional Approach to Extraterritoriality in International Human Rights Law, 7 Law & Ethics of Human Rights 47 (2013).

60. Shaw M. International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008).

61. Sheeran S. Reconceptualizing States of Emergency Under International Human Rights Law: Theory, Legal Doctrine, and Politics, 34(3) Michigan Journal of International Law 491 (2013).

62. Szydło M. Extra-Territorial Application of the European Convention on Human Rights After Al-Skeini and Al-Jedda, 12(1) International Criminal Law Review 271 (2012).

63. Talmon S. The Responsibility of Outside Powers for Acts of Secessionist Entities, 58(3) International & Comparative Law Quarterly 493 (2009).

64. Trilsch M. & Ruth A. Bankovic v. Belgium, 97 American Journal of International Law 168 (2003).

65. Van der Sloot B. Is All Fair in Love and War? An Analysis of the Case Law on Article 15 ECHR, 53(2) Military Law and Law of War Review 319 (2014).

66. Van der Wilt H. & Lyngdorf S. Procedural Obligations Under the European Convention on Human Rights: Useful Guidelines for the Assessment of “Unwillingness” and “Inability” in the Context of the Complementarity Principle, 9 International Criminal Law Review 39 (2009).

67. Watkin K. Controlling the Use of Force: A Role for Human Rights Norms in Contemporary Armed Conflict, 98(1) American Journal of International Law 1 (2004).

68. White R.C.A. Tackling Political Disputes Through Individual Applications, 1 European Human Rights Law Review 61 (1998).

69. Wilde R. Legal “Black Hole”? Extraterritorial State Action and International Treaty Law on Civil and Political Rights, 26(3) Michigan Journal of International Law 739 (2005).

70. Wilde R. The Extraterritorial Application of International Human Rights Law on Civil and Political Rights in Routledge Handbook of International Human Rights Law 635 (S. Sheeran & N. Rodley (eds.), Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2013).

71. Williams J. Al Skeini: A Flawed Interpretation of Banković, 23(4) Wisconsin International Law Journal 687 (2005).


For citation:


Wallace S., Mallory C. Applying the European Convention on Human Rights to the Conflict in Ukraine. Russian Law Journal. 2018;6(3):8-78. https://doi.org/10.17589/2309-8678-2018-6-3-8-78

Views: 498


ISSN 2309-8678 (Print)
ISSN 2312-3605 (Online)