International Custom Making and the ECtHR's European Consensus Method of Interpretation

European Yearbook on Human Rights, 2016, vol. 16, pp. 313-344.

30 Pages Posted: 7 Jul 2016

See all articles by Dr Vassilis P Tzevelekos

Dr Vassilis P Tzevelekos

University of Liverpool - School of Law & Social Justice

Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou

University of Liverpool

Date Written: July 6, 2016

Abstract

European consensus (EuC) is a method of interpretation created by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which uses it to adjudicate cases involving morally/politically sensitive issues. The method consists of comparative analysis as a means for the identification of evolution in the practice of European states that reflects consensus about the emergence of human rights standards. If the Court finds consensus, it permits itself to establish pan-European standards that bind all states under its jurisdiction. The paper asks whether -- outside its actual function -- EuC may be employed to identify (regional) custom stemming from the practice of the European Convention of Human Rights signatories, that is, if EuC may be seen as a method for the identification of custom. To answer that question, the paper examines the function of EuC and compares it with custom. To escape the problem of the plurality of definitions of and perceptions about custom, the paper turns to the role of international judges and courts in the identification of custom, arguing that, although these do not make customary rules (i.e. judicial function is not constitutive of custom), they are in a position to drastically influence the definition of custom as a source of law. The conclusion reached is that, despite EuC’s sonorous similarities with custom, there are also significant differences between the two. EuC is not tantamount to custom. Yet, this could change if the ECtHR decided to define (regional) custom as coinciding with EuC. This is so because courts have the power and authority to shape the definition of custom.

Keywords: European consensus, European Convention on Human Rights, European Court of Human Rights, treaty interpretation, evolutive/dynamic interpretation, international customary law, law making, sources of international law, judicial function, state practice, regional/particular custom, rule of recognition

Suggested Citation

Tzevelekos, Vassilis and Dzehtsiarou, Kanstantsin, International Custom Making and the ECtHR's European Consensus Method of Interpretation (July 6, 2016). European Yearbook on Human Rights, 2016, vol. 16, pp. 313-344.. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2805405 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2805405

Vassilis Tzevelekos (Contact Author)

University of Liverpool - School of Law & Social Justice ( email )

Brownlow Hill
Liverpool, L69 3BX
United Kingdom

HOME PAGE: http://https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/law/staff/vassilis-tzevelekos/

Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou

University of Liverpool ( email )

Brownlow Hill
Liverpool, L69 3BX
United Kingdom

HOME PAGE: http://https://www.liv.ac.uk/law/staff/kanstantsin-dzehtsiarou/

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
298
Abstract Views
962
rank
100,148
PlumX Metrics