The Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights: A Score Card for an Effective Enforcement of the Human Rights Regime

Abstract

Europe has succeeded in principle, in moving from the stage of proclamation of inalienable Human Rights – a gesture of political intent, to that of their effective implementation. Despite a great beginning when the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (E.C.H.R) was signed in 1956, the path to effective protection of Human Rights has been long and difficult even in Europe. The European Court of Human Rights established in 1959 was the first Independent International Tribunal dedicated to the protection of Human Rights. This article examines the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Right as a panacea for an effective enforcement of the human rights regime and concludes that the European Courts of Human Rights jurisprudence reaches a good equilibrium on many matters, while on a few others, in the eyes of the present commentator, it could still be improved. Similarly, the court rather than divesting itself of its specific mistake in order to become a general court of cassation of the Council of Europe member states, have instead engaged in a middle way, assigning to itself the role of an essential milestone in the protection and constant development of that branch of law called ‘Human Rights’ and which embodies in some sort, worded general propositions and the essential political and legal commitments of the democratic state of Europe.