ABSTRACT

The European Convention on Human Rights was conceived after the Second World War as a means of preventing the kind of violation of human rights seen in Germany during and before the war. However, it has not generally been invoked in relation to large scale violations of rights, but instead has addressed particular deficiencies in the legal systems of the Member States, who on the whole create regimes of human rights in conformity with it. Drafted in 1949 by the Council of Europe, it was based on the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights,2 and partly for that reason and partly because it was only intended to provide basic protection for human rights, it appears today as quite a cautious document, less far reaching than the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.3 Nevertheless, it has had far more effect on UK law than any other human rights treaty due to its machinery for enforcement, which includes the European Court of Human Rights with the power to deliver a ruling adverse to the governments of Member States. Moreover, the Court insists upon the dynamic nature of the Convention and adopts a teleological or purpose-based approach to its interpretation which has allowed the substantive rights to develop until they may cover situations unthought of in 1949. Had it been a more radical document, the Convention might have been self-defeating because it might have failed to secure the necessary acceptance from Member States, both in terms of ratifying various parts of it, such as the right of individual petition, and in terms of responding to adverse judgments.