The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts
Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 0 Sayı: 70 Sayfa Aralığı: 91 - 118 Metin Dili: Fransızca DOI: 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 İndeks Tarihi: 27-05-2022
The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts
Öz: This paper aims to argue that over approximately the last 70 years, both constitutional courts in Continental European
legal systems and the European Court of Human Rights have implemented an evolutive (dynamic) approach to human
rights by making broad interpretation of both constitutional or Convention rights. It also argues that the philosophical
grounds of this interpretive approach are consistent with Gadamer’s conception of “philosophical hermeneutics,” which
refers to interpretation as a cognitive dialogue on the text, between the author’s and the reader’s intent, which is not
strictly bound by an obligation on the reader to adhere to the author’s intent.
Anahtar Kelime: AİHM ve Ulusal Mahkemeler İçtihadında Temel Hakların Yorumunda Hermeneutiğin Yükselişi
Öz: Bu çalışmada, son 70 yılda gerek Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi gerekse de Kıta Avrupası ülkelerindeki Anayasa
Mahkemelerinin Sözleşme’de yer alan haklar ya da Anayasalarda yer alan temel hak ve özgürlükleri genişletici bir şekilde
yorumlayarak bu haklara evrimsel (dinamik) bir yaklaşım kazandırdıkları öne sürülmektedir. Dahası, Mahkemelerin
benimsediği bu yorumsal anlayışın temelinde Gadamer’in “felsefi hermeneutik” adını verdiği bir kavramsallaştırmanın
yattığı ileri sürülecektir. Bu anlayış, yorum faaliyetini, yazar ile okuyucunun niyeti arasında, okuyucunun yazarın niyetine
sıkı sıkıya bağlı olmadığı bilişsel bir diyalog süreci olarak algılamaktadır.
Anahtar Kelime: Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
- Alexy, R, A Theory of Constitutional Rights (Julian Rivers tr, Oxford University Press 2002) Annino, PG, An Evaluation of Ronald Dworkin’s Hermeneutical Theory of Law (Dphil Thesis, Fordham University, 1997).
- Bellamy, R, Political Constitutionalism: Republican Defence of the Constitutionality of Democracy, (Cambridge University Press, 2007).
- Bellamy, R, ‘Political Constitutionalism and The Human Rights Act’ (2011) 9 (1) International Journal of Constitutional Law 86-111.
- Björge, E, ‘Bottom-Up Shaping of Rights: How the Scope of Human Rights at the National Level Impact upon Convention Rights’, in Eva Brems, Janneke Gerards (eds), Shaping Rights in the ECHR: The Role of The European Court of Human Rights in Determining the Scope of Human Rights, (Cambridge University Press, 2013)
- Brems, E, ‘The “Logics” of Procedural-Type Review by the European Court of Human Rights’ in Janneke Gerards, Eva Brems (eds) Procedural Review in European Fundamental Rights Cases, (Cambridge University Press, 2017)
- Cappelletti, M, The Judicial Process in Comparative Perspective, (Clarendon Press, 1989).
- Çalı, B, ‘From Flexible to Variable Standards of Judicial Review: The Responsible Domestic Courts Doctrine at the European Court of Human Rights’ in Oddný Mjöll Árnadóttir, Antoine Buyse (eds) Shifting Centres of Gravity in Human Rights Protection: Rethinking Between the ECHR, EU, and National Legal Orders, (Routledge, 2016)
- Council of Europe, High Level Conference on the Future of the European Court of Human Rights Brighton Declaration, Brighton, 18-20 April 2012, H/Inf (2012) 3.
- Cumper, P/Lewis, T, ‘Blanket Bans, Subsidiarity, and the Procedural Turn of the European Court Of Human Rights’ (2019) International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 68 (3) 611-638
- Dembour, MB, Who Believes in Human Rights Reflections on the European Convention (Cambridge University Press 2006)
- Donato, J, ‘Dworkin and Subjectivity in Legal Interpretation’ (1998) 40 (6) Stanford Law Review 1517-1541
- Douglas, B, ‘Too attentive to our duty: the fundamental conflict underlying human rights protection in the UK’ (2018) 38 (3) Legal Studies’ 360-378
- Dworkin, R, A Matter of Principle (Harvard University Press 1985)
- Dworkin, R, ‘Law as Interpretation’ 1982 (60) Texas Law Review 179-200
- Dworkin, R, Law’s Empire (Harvard University Press 1986)
- Dworkin, R, Taking Rights Seriously, (Harvard University Press, 1978).
- Dzehtsiarou, K, ‘European Consensus and the Evolutive Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights’ (2011) 12 (10) German Law Journal 1730-1745
- Elliot, M, The Constitutional Foundations of Judicial Review, (Hart Publishing, 2001).
- Ely, JH, Democracy and Distrust: A Theory of Judicial Review (Harvard University Press 1980)
- Eskridge, W, ‘Gadamer/Statutory Interpetation’ (1990) 90 Columbia Law Review 609-681
- European Court of Human Rights, Guidelines on the implementation of the advisory-opinion procedure introduced by Protocol No. 16 to the Convention (as approved by the Plenary Court on 18 September 2017.
- Fickle, SC, ‘The Dawn’s Early Light: The Contributions of John Hart Ely to Constitutional Theory’ (1981) 56 Indiana Law Journal 637-672
- Gadamer, HG, ‘Classical and Philosophical Hermeneutics’ (2006) 23 (1) Theory, Culture And Society 29-56
- Gadamer, HG, Truth and Method (Continuum 2004)
- Gardbaum, S, ‘Are Strong Constitutional Courts Always a Good Thing for New Democracies?’ (2015) 53 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 285-320
- Gerards, J, ‘Advisory Opinions, Preliminary Rulings and the New Protocol No. 16 to the European Convention of Human Rights A Comparative and Critical Appraisal’ (2014) Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 21 (4) 630-651
- Ginsburg, T, Judicial Review In New Democracies Constitutional Courts In Asian Cases (1st edn, Cambridge University Press 2003)
- Hailbronner, M, ‘Rethinking the Rise of the German Constitutional Court: From anti-Nazism to Value Formalism’ (2014) 12 (3) International Journal of Constitutional Law 626–649.
- Hall, JB, ‘Taking “Rechts” Seriously: Ronald Dworkin and the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany’ (2008) 9 (6) German Law Journal 771-798
- Henley, K, ‘Protestan Hermeneutics and the Rule of Law: Gadamer and Dworkin’ (1990) 3 (1) Ratio Juris 14-28
- Hasnas, John, ‘Back to the Future: From Critical Legal Studies forward to Legal Realism, or How not to Miss the Point of Indeterminacy Argument’ (1995) 45 (84) Duke Law Journal 84-132
- Hoy, DC ‘Interpreting The Law: Hermeneutical and Poststructuralist Perspectives’ (1985) 58 (135) Southern California Law Review 135-176.
- Hutt, DEB, ‘Against Judicial Supremacy in Constitutional Interpretation’ (2017) (31) Revus, Journal for Constitutional Theory and Philosophy of Law 83-106
- Issacharoff, S, ‘Constitutional Courts and Democratic Hedging’ (2010) 9 (4) The Georgetown Law Journal 961-1012
- Kemmerer, A, ‘Sources in the Meta-Theory of International Law: Hermeneutical Conversations’ in Samantha Besson and Jean d’Aspremont (eds) The Oxford Handbook of the Sources of International Law (Oxford University Press 2017).
- Kleinlein, T, ‘The Procedural Approach of the European Court of Human Rights: Between Subsidiarity and Dynamic Evolution’ (2019), International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 68 (1) 91-110
- Klement, JH, ‘Common Law Thinking in German Jurisprudence-on Alexy’s Principles Theory’ in Matthias Klatt (ed), Institutionalized Reason: The Jurisprudence of Robert Alexy (Oxford University Press 2012)
- Knowles, HJ/Toia, JA, ‘Defining ‘Popular Constitutionalism: The Kramer versus Kramer Problem’ (2014) 42 (1) Southern University Law Review 31-59
- Kramer, L, The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review, (Oxford University Press, 2004).
- Koch, IE, Human Rights as Indivisible Rights The Protection of Socio-Economic Demands under the European Convention on Human Rights (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2009)
- Koffeman, N.R., (The right to) personal autonomy in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, (LL.M), Leiden, 2010, available at: https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden. nl/access/item%3A2885722/view, Access: 21.08.2021.
- Kommers, D, The Constitutional Jurisprudence of the Federal Republic of Germany (Duke University Press 1989)
- Lemmens, K, ‘Protocol No 16 to the ECHR: Managing Backlog through Complex Judicial Dialogue?’ (2019), European Constitutional Law Review 15 (4) 691-713
- Letsas, G, ‘Strasbourg’s Interpretive Ethic: Lessons for the International Lawyer’ (2010) 21 (3) European Journal of International Law 509-541
- Lever, A, ‘Democracy and Judicial Review: Are They Really Incompatible?’ (2009) 7 (4) Perspectives on Politics 805-822
- Leyh, G, ‘Dworkin’s Hermeneutics’ (1987) 39 Mercer Law Review 851-866
- Lord Kerr, ‘The Need for Dialogue Between National Courts and the European Court of Human Rights’ in (eds) Spyridon Flogaitis, Tom Zwart, Julie Fraser, The European Court of Human Rights and Its Discontents: Turning Criticism into Strength, (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2013)
- Madsen, MR, ‘The Protracted Institutionalization of the Strasbourg Court: From Legal Diplomacy to Integrationist Jurisprudence’ in Jonas Christoffersen and Mikael Rask Madsen (eds), The European Court of Human Rights Between Law and Politics (Oxford University Press 2011)
- Masterman, R, ‘Aspiration or Foundation? The status of the Strasbourg Jurisprudence and the “Convention Rights” in domestic law’, in Helen Fenwick, Gavin Phillipson, Roger Masterman, (eds.) Judicial Reasoning under the Human Rights Act, (Cambridge University Press, 2007)
- Mcgarry, J, Intention, Supremacy and the Theories of Judicial Review (Routledge 2017)
- Mootz, FJ., ‘The Ontological Basis of Legal Hermeneutics: A Proposed Model of Inquiry Based on the Work of Gadamer, Habermas and Ricoeur’ (1988) 68 Boston University Law Review 523-617
- Orakhelashvili, A, ‘Restrictive Interpretation of Human Rights Treatise in the Recent Jurisprudence of European Court Human Rights’ (2003) 14 (3) European Journal of International Law 529-568
- Palmer, R, Hermeneutics Interpretation Theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger and Gadamer (Northern University Press 1969)
- Plunkett, D/ Sandel, T, ‘Dworkin’s Interpretivism and the Pragmatics of Legal Disputes’ 2013 (19) Legal Theory 242-281
- Roach, K, ‘The Varied Roles of Courts and Legislatures in Rights Protection’ in Murray Hunt, Hayley J. Hooper and Paul Yowell (eds) Parliaments and Human Rights Redressing the Democratic Deficit (Hart Publishing 2015)
- Rosenfeld, M, ‘Dworkin and the One Law Principle: A Pluralist Critique’ (2005) 3 (233) Revue Internationale de Philosophie 363-392
- Scheuerman, W, Carl Schmitt: The End of Law, (Rowman&Littlefield Publishers, 1999).
- Senden, H, Interpretation of Fundamental Rights in a Multilevel Legal System, (Intersentia 2009)
- Solum, LB, ‘Indeterminacy’ in Dennis Patterson (ed), A Companion to Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory (Wiley-Blackwell 2010)
- Spano, R, ‘The Future of the European Court of Human Rights—Subsidiarity, Process-Based Review and the Rule of Law’ (2018) Human Rights Law Review, 18 (3) 473-494
- Stelmach, J/Brozek, B, The Methods of Legal Reasoning (Springer 2006)
- Stiansen, Ø/Voeten, E, ‘Backlash and Judicial Restraint: Evidence from the European Court of Human Rights’ (2020) International Studies Quarterly 64 (4) 770-784
- Tushnet, M, ‘Alternative Forms of Judicial Review’ (2003) 101 (8) Michigan Law Review 2781-2802
- Tushnet, M, Weak Form Judicial Review and “Core” Civil Liberties’ (2006) 41 Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Review 1-22
- Tushnet, M, Taking the Constitution Away from The Courts, (Princeton University Press, 1999).
- Tschentscher, A, The Basic Law (Grundgesetz): The Constitution of Federal Republic of Germany (May 23rd, 1949), (Jurisprudentia, 2016)
- Waldron, J, ‘The Core of The Case Against Judicial Review’ (2006) 115 (6) The Yale Law Journal 1346-1406
- Court Judgments
- Airey v. Ireland App no 6289/73 (ECtHR, 09 September 1979)
- Bankovic and Others v. Belgium and Others, App no. 52207/99, (ECtHR, 12 December 2001)
- Case “Relating to Certain Aspects of the Laws on the Use of Languages in Educatıon in Belgium” v. Belgıum (Merits) App nos 1474/62; 1677/62; 1691/62; 1769/63; 1994/63; 2126/64, (ECtHR 23 July 1968)
- Engel and Others v. Netherlands App nos 5100/71; 5101/71; 5102/71; 5354/72; 5370/72 (ECtHR, 08 June 1976)
- Golder v. United Kingdom App no 4451/70 (ECtHR 21 February 1975)
- Ireland v. The United Kingdom App no 5310/71 (ECtHR 18 January 1978)
- Johnston and Others v. Ireland, App No 9697/82, (ECtHR, 18 December 1986)
- Loizidou v. Turkey App no 15318/89 (ECtHR 18 December 1996)
- Lawless v. Ireland App no 332/57 (ECtHR 01 July 1961)
- Öneryıldız v. Turkey App no 48939/99 (30 November 1993)
- Sorensen and Rasmussen v. Denmark, App Nos 52562/99 and 52620/99, (ECtHR, 11 July.2006)
- The Federal German Constitutional Court –Bundesverfassungsgericht, BVerfGE 6, 32.
- Turkish Constitutional Court, Emin Aydın (2) Başvurusu, App No: 2013/3178
- Tyrer v United Kingdom App no 5856/72 (ECtHR, 25 April 1978)
- X and Y v. Netherlands App no 8978/80 (ECtHR 26 March 1985)
- Vordur Olafsson v. Iceland, App no 20161/06, (ECtHR, 27 April 2010)
- Wemhoff v. Germany App no 2122/64 (ECtHR 27 July 1968)
- Squirrell Ltd. v. National Westminister Bank plc and HM Customs and Excise, [2006] -1-W.L.R.-637.
| APA | Erdoğan M (2021). The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts. , 91 - 118. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| Chicago | Erdoğan Murat The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts. (2021): 91 - 118. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| MLA | Erdoğan Murat The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts. , 2021, ss.91 - 118. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| AMA | Erdoğan M The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts. . 2021; 91 - 118. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| Vancouver | Erdoğan M The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts. . 2021; 91 - 118. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| IEEE | Erdoğan M "The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts." , ss.91 - 118, 2021. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| ISNAD | Erdoğan, Murat. "The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts". (2021), 91-118. https://doi.org/10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| APA | Erdoğan M (2021). The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts. Annales de la Faculté de Droit d Istanbul, 0(70), 91 - 118. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| Chicago | Erdoğan Murat The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts. Annales de la Faculté de Droit d Istanbul 0, no.70 (2021): 91 - 118. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| MLA | Erdoğan Murat The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts. Annales de la Faculté de Droit d Istanbul, vol.0, no.70, 2021, ss.91 - 118. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| AMA | Erdoğan M The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts. Annales de la Faculté de Droit d Istanbul. 2021; 0(70): 91 - 118. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| Vancouver | Erdoğan M The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts. Annales de la Faculté de Droit d Istanbul. 2021; 0(70): 91 - 118. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| IEEE | Erdoğan M "The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts." Annales de la Faculté de Droit d Istanbul, 0, ss.91 - 118, 2021. 10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
| ISNAD | Erdoğan, Murat. "The Rise of Hermeneutics in Human Rights Interpretation in the Case-Law of the ECtHR and the Domestic Courts". Annales de la Faculté de Droit d Istanbul 70 (2021), 91-118. https://doi.org/10.26650/annales.2021.70.0004 |
