European Journal of International Law, Vol. 23, 2012
Posted: 26 Aug 2011 Last revised: 28 Mar 2012
Date Written: August 26, 2011
The article analyses the European Court of Human Rights’ recent judgments in Al-Skeini v. United Kingdom and Al-Jedda v. United Kingdom. The former is set to become the leading Strasbourg authority on the extraterritorial application of the ECHR; the latter presents significant developments with regard to issues such as the dual attribution of conduct to states and to international organizations, norm conflict, the relationship between the ECHR and general international law, and the ability or inability of UN Security Council decisions to displace human rights treaties by virtue of Article 103 of the UN Charter. The article critically examines the reasoning behind the two judgments, as well as their broad policy implications regarding ECHR member state action abroad and their implementation of various Security Council measures.
Note: in accordance with the EJIL's online exclusivity policy, the pre-print draft has now been removed from SSRN, as the article has been published at the Oxford Journals website and will be available free of charge in due course on the EJIL's own website.
Keywords: Al-Skeini, Al-Jedda, extraterritoriality, norm conflict, Article 103
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Milanovic, Marko, Al-Skeini and Al-Jedda in Strasbourg (August 26, 2011). European Journal of International Law, Vol. 23, 2012. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1917395