Positive obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights within and beyond boundaries
'Positive Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights' provides novel insight into the elements underlying a state's responsibility to fulfil positive obligations. It is essential reading for academics, legal practitioners, and policymakers working across the diverse fie...
| Otros Autores: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Libro electrónico |
| Idioma: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
Oxford :
Oxford University Press
2023.
|
| Edición: | First edition |
| Colección: | Oxford scholarship online.
|
| Materias: | |
| Ver en Biblioteca Universitat Ramon Llull: | https://discovery.url.edu/permalink/34CSUC_URL/1im36ta/alma991009781186406719 |
Tabla de Contenidos:
- Intro
- Title Page
- Copyright Page
- Preface
- Contents
- Table of Cases
- Introduction
- 1 Deconstructing Positive Obligations
- Introduction
- 1.1 The State as an Institutional Mediator
- 1.2 Justifications for Positive Obligations
- 1.3 Plurality of Obligations Owed by the State
- 1.4 Priority of Rights as Organizational Principles
- 1.5 Trigger, Scope, Content, and Types of Positive Obligations
- Conclusion
- 2 State Knowledge
- Introduction
- 2.1 The Role of Fault in State Responsibility
- 2.2 Triggering and Breach of Positive Obligations under ECHR
- 2.3 Actual Knowledge versus Putative Knowledge
- 2.3.1 Different Possible Ways of Assessing Putative Knowledge
- 2.3.2 State Knowledge Necessarily Implies Normative Assessment
- 2.4 Assessment of Knowledge
- 2.5 No Benefit of Hindsight
- 2.6 Burden of Proof
- 2.7 The Nature and the Level of Risk
- 2.7.1 The 'Real and Immediate Risk' Standard
- 2.7.2 Man-made versus Natural Harms
- 2.8 Contributory Fault of the Victim
- Conclusion
- 3 Causation
- Introduction
- 3.1 The Role and the Standard of Causation
- 3.2 Control and Causation
- 3.2.1 The Rules on Attribution
- 3.2.2 The Role of Control and the Extension of the Logic of the Rules on Attribution
- 3.2.3 Control and Prevention of State-inflicted Harm
- 3.2.4 Assumption of Control in the Area of Public Services
- 3.2.5 Source of the Harm and the Related Level of Control
- 3.2.6 Assumption of Control over the Victim
- 3.3 Techniques for Avoiding Causation
- 3.3.1 Domestic Legality
- 3.3.2 Procedural Protection
- 3.4 Technique for Limiting Responsibility when Causation is Present
- Conclusion
- 4 Reasonableness
- Introduction
- 4.1 Intertwinement with Knowledge and Causation
- 4.1.1 Weak Causation Counterbalanced by the Reasonableness Standard.
- 4.1.2 Strong Causation Counterbalanced by the Reasonableness Standard
- 4.1.3 Reasonableness and Immediacy of the Risk
- 4.1.4 The Importance and the Justifiability of the Analytical Distinctions
- 4.2 Consideration of Alternative Protective Measures
- 4.2.1 Levels of Abstraction/Concreteness and the Burden of Proof
- 4.2.2 Place and Formulation of the Alternative
- 4.2.3 The Standard of Protectiveness
- 4.3 Margin of Appreciation
- 4.3.1 Delineation between Structural Deference and Appreciation of Alternatives
- 4.3.2 Scrutiny in the Appreciation of Alternatives
- Conclusion
- 5 Competing Obligations
- Introduction
- 5.1 Specification for Tensions to Become Cognizable
- 5.2 The Distinction between General Interests and Interests that Form the Basis of Human Rights
- 5.3 Addressing the Competition
- 5.3.1 Equal Moral Status
- 5.3.2 The Relative Importance of the Interests and the Obligations Triggered
- 5.3.3 Action versus Omission
- 5.3.4 Determinacy of the Harm and the Affected Individuals
- 5.4 Accommodation of Obligations
- Conclusion
- 6 Procedural Positive Obligation to Investigate
- Introduction
- 6.1 Conditions that Trigger the Obligation
- 6.1.1 Harm Inflicted by State Actors
- 6.1.2 Harm Inflicted by Non-state Actors
- 6.1.3 Harm Linked with Arguable Omissions
- 6.2 Content and Scope of the Obligation
- 6.2.1 Type of Proceedings
- 6.2.2 Initiation of the Proceedings
- 6.2.3 Effectiveness
- 6.2.4 Cooperation with Other States in Cross-border Contexts
- Conclusion
- 7 Substantive Positive Obligations
- Introduction
- 7.1 Obligation to Develop Effective Regulatory Frameworks
- 7.1.1 Diversity of Regulatory Spheres and the Role of Criminal Law
- 7.1.2 Types of Deficiencies in the Regulatory Framework
- 7.1.3 Concrete or Abstract Reasonableness Review of the Regulatory Framework.
- 7.2 Obligation to Develop Effective National Procedures
- 7.2.1 Not a Self-standing Positive Obligation
- 7.2.2 The Content of the Obligation
- 7.3 Obligation to Take Protective Operational Measures
- 7.3.1 The Test as Originally Developed in Osman v the United Kingdom
- 7.3.2 Modifications of the Test Regarding the Actors of Harm, the Objects of Harm, and the Immediacy of the Risk
- 7.3.3 Adjustment of the Test by Adding Risk Assessment as an 'Integral Part'
- 7.3.4 Adjustment of the Test by Adding Harm-related, Temporal, and Geographical Specifications
- 7.3.5 Content and Scope of the Obligation-the Operational Measures
- Conclusion
- 8 Extraterritorial Positive Obligations
- Introduction
- 8.1 Positive Obligations' Normative Preconditions
- 8.1.1 The Role of the State in Society
- 8.1.2 Democratic Legitimacy and Territorial Boundedness
- 8.1.3 Not Contingent Exclusively on Actual Capacity
- 8.2 Deconstructing Jurisdiction
- 8.2.1 The Territorial Paradigm
- 8.2.2 Effective Control over an Area
- 8.2.3 Physical Power and Control over a Person
- 8.2.4 Acts of Diplomatic and Consular Agents
- 8.2.5 Exercise of Public Powers
- 8.2.6 Extraterritorial Effects
- 8.2.7 Procedural Link
- 8.2.8 Conclusion
- 8.3 Adapting Jurisdiction to the Obligations?
- 8.3.1 Dividing and Tailoring
- 8.3.2 Dividing the Tailoring Brought to a Breaking Point
- 8.3.3 Conclusion
- 8.4 Deconstructing Extraterritorial Positive Obligations
- 8.4.1 Legality and Legal Competence
- 8.4.2 Reasonableness and Balancing of Interests
- 8.4.3 Causation
- Conclusion
- Conclusion
- Select Bibliography
- Index.
