@article{CalıKoch, author = {{\c{C}}al{\i}, Ba{\c{s}}ak and Koch, Anne}, title = {Foxes Guarding the Foxes? The Peer Review of Human Rights Judgments by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe}, series = {Human Rights Law Review}, volume = {14}, journal = {Human Rights Law Review}, number = {2}, publisher = {Oxford Academic}, issn = {1744-1021}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngu007}, pages = {301 -- 325}, abstract = {This article investigates the reliability of the peer review of human rights judgments by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. It argues that, even if composed of politically motivated actors, the Committee is not to be dismissed too cursorily as a deficient and unreliable system of compliance monitoring. Evidence shows that formal and informal institutional constraints, in particular the presence of a strong Secretariat, constrain the propensity to bargain amongst Council of Europe diplomats acting as peers when monitoring the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. Our finding runs contrary to the proposition that Europe constitutes a special case of cultural convergence around respect for international human rights law. The article further argues that hybrid models of compliance monitoring which combine political as well as judicial and technocratic elements may be more effective in facilitating human rights compliance than direct international court orders or expert recommendations.}, language = {en} } @article{Calı, author = {{\c{C}}al{\i}, Ba{\c{s}}ak}, title = {'To me, fair friend, you can never be old´, William Shakespeare, ´Sonnet 104´: ECHR at 70. Rudolf Bernhardt Lecture, 2020}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r ausl{\"a}ndisches {\"o}ffentliches Recht und V{\"o}lkerrecht / Heidelberg Journal of International Law}, volume = {81}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r ausl{\"a}ndisches {\"o}ffentliches Recht und V{\"o}lkerrecht / Heidelberg Journal of International Law}, number = {4}, issn = {0044-2348}, doi = {10.17104/0044-2348-2021-4-895}, pages = {895 -- 916}, abstract = {This article undertakes a survey of the changes in the structure of the interpretive doctrines of the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) over time in an exploration of the aging of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR or the Convention) on its 70th anniversary. It argues that the Court's interpretive doctrines that seek to give due defer ence to national rights traditions, canons and institutions have become increasingly pervasive in the Court's procedural and substantive case law in the last two decades. This, in particular, has come at a loss for interpretative doctrines that interpret the Convention as a practical and effective living pan-European instrument. This argument is built in four parts. First it offers a defence of why a study of the interpretive doctrines of the Court over time is a good proxy for studying the ECHR's ageing process. In the second part, it discusses the rich doctrinal forms of due deference and effective interpretation in the case law of the Court - both young and mature. Part three explains how the judicialisation and expansion of the European human rights system in late 1990 s transitioned to a more height ened and sophisticated focus on due deference doctrines in the Court's case law. Finally, part four examines whether the recent judicial innovations under the Court's Article 18 case law and the widely celebrated success of increased ownership of the Convention by domestic courts can act as counter points to the argument that the effective interpretation principle has suffered a loss as the Convention has aged, concluding that none of this may offset the fact that the Convention at 70 is more conservative in spirit than its younger self.}, language = {en} }