Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
European Court (european + court)
Selected AbstractsTHE EUROPEAN COURT: THE FORGOTTEN POWERHOUSE BUILDING THE EUROPEAN SUPERSTATEECONOMIC AFFAIRS, Issue 1 2004Martin Howe Less attention is paid to the European Court of Justice than to other European Union institutions when discussing the centralising tendencies of the Union. However, the court has given an important impetus to the process of centralisation through its individual decisions and also through its tendency to give effect in its decisions to what it believes to be the,purpose'of EU treaties rather than to the text of the treaties. The proposed EU constitution will significantly widen the power of the European Court since it includes articles which are wide open to a number of different interpretations, and it will be for the court to decide how they should be interpreted. [source] Taking Language Seriously: An Analysis of Linguistic Reasoning and Its Implications in EU LawEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 4 2010Elina Paunio This article discusses legal reasoning at the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The following questions are addressed. First, the authors look at the way linguistic arguments are used in ECJ case-law. Second, they consider whether the requirements of legal certainty, and more specifically that of predictability, may be fulfilled by reference to linguistic arguments in a multilingual legal system. The theoretical starting-point is that of open-endedness of language: no means exists to definitely pin down the meaning of words. Defining the meaning of words in a legal context is necessarily a matter of choice involving evaluative considerations. Consequently, when the ECJ uses linguistic arguments to justify a decision, it is an active agent choosing the meaning of words in a specific case. Essentially, the authors argue that legal reasoning based on linguistic arguments is particularly problematic from the viewpoint of legal certainty and predictability. In this respect, the key importance of systemic and teleological argumentation is emphasised in assuring convincing, acceptable and transparent legal reasoning especially in the context of multilingual EU law. [source] The Function of the Proportionality Principle in EU LawEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 2 2010Tor-Inge Harbo In this article the author assesses the proportionality principle in EU law from a legal theoretical and constitutional perspective with the aim of discovering the function of the principle. Having first discussed the implications of the proportionality principle being a general principle of law, and what function it has,namely to secure legitimacy for judicial decisions,the author suggests that there are several ways in which the principle can be interpreted. There is, nevertheless, a limit to this interpretation determined by the proposed function of the principle. In the third part of the article, the European Court of Justice's (ECJ's) interpretation of the principle is assessed. The assessment clearly shows that the ECJ is interpreting the principle in different distinguishable ways. The question could, however, be raised as to whether the ECJ in some areas is interpreting the principle in a way that undermines the very function of it. [source] Family Reunification Rights of (Migrant) Union Citizens: Towards a More Liberal ApproachEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 5 2009Alina Tryfonidou Over the years, in the case-law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) determining the availability of family reunification rights for migrant Member State nationals, the pendulum has swung back and forth, from a ,moderate approach' in cases such as Morson and Jhanjan (1982) and Akrich (2003), towards a more ,liberal approach' in cases such as Carpenter (2002) and Jia (2007). Under the Court's ,moderate approach', family reunification rights in the context of the Community's internal market policy are only granted in situations where this is necessary for enabling a Member State national to move between Member States in the process of exercising one of the economic fundamental freedoms; in other words, where there is a sufficient link between the exercise of one of those freedoms and the need to grant family reunification rights under EC law. Conversely, under the Court's ,liberal approach', in order for family reunification rights to be bestowed by EC law, it suffices that the situation involves the exercise of one of the market freedoms and that the claimants have a familial link which is covered by Community law; in other words, there is no need to illustrate that there is a link between the grant of such rights and the furtherance of the Community's aim of establishing an internal market. The recent judgments of the ECJ in Eind and Metock (and its order in Sahin) appear to have decidedly moved the pendulum towards the ,liberal approach' side. In this article, it will be explained that the fact that the EU is aspiring to be not only a supranational organisation with a successful and smoothly functioning market but also a polity, the citizens of which enjoy a number of basic rights which form the core of a meaningful status of Union citizenship, is the major driving force behind this move. In particular, the move towards a wholehearted adoption of the ,liberal approach' seems to have been fuelled by a desire, on the part of the Court, to respond to a number of problems arising from its ,moderate approach' and which appear to be an anomaly in a citizens' Europe. These are: a) the incongruity caused between the (new) aim of the Community of creating a meaningful status of Union citizenship and the treatment of Union citizens (under the Court's ,moderate approach') as mere factors of production; and b) the emergence of reverse discrimination. The article will conclude with an explanation of why the adoption of the Court's liberal approach does not appear to be a proper solution to these problems. [source] Ironies in Human Rights Protection in the EU: Pre-Accession Conditionality and Post-Accession ConundrumsEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 1 2009Anneli Albi In the wake of the extensive scrutiny of the human rights credentials of the new Member States under the EU pre-accession conditionality, which itself was riddled with paradoxes, this article considers a rather unexpected irony thrown up by the accession of these countries. It is that the post-communist constitutional courts, which have been applauded for vigorous protection of fundamental rights after the fall of the Communist regime that was marked by nihilism to rights, have come rather close to having to downgrade the protection standards after accession, due to the new constraints of supremacy of EC law. The article will consider the sugar market cases of the Hungarian and Czech Constitutional Courts and of the Estonian Supreme Court, which appear to add weight to the concerns that have been voiced in some older Member States about the fundamental rights protection in the EU. Indeed such concerns were recently also addressed in the concurring opinions to the Bosphorus judgment of the European Court of Human Rights. [source] National Judges, Community Judges: Invitation to a Journey through the Looking-glass,On the Need for Jurisdictions to Rethink the Inter-systemic Relations beyond the Hierarchical PrincipleEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 6 2008Florence Giorgi The historical conflict between the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the national constitutional courts regarding primacy is a misunderstanding. In going through the looking-glass, we can understand that, on the contrary, the ECJ and the national constitutional courts adopt comparable solutions in their treatment of legal pluralism, and that they see the negation of pluralism as essential for the survival of their own legal orders. Therefore, these judges must be offered a new theoretical context to help them reconcile their role as supreme guardian with the taking into account of the pluralist context. Finally, practical proposals must be made to give judges the instruments and techniques that are capable of reflecting this plural structure. [source] Judicial Review of European Anti-Terrorism Measures,The Yusuf and Kadi Judgments of the Court of First InstanceEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 1 2008Christina Eckes It accepted that the Community uses its competence to adopt state sanctions in combination with Article 308 EC to freeze the assets of civil persons, including European citizens. The court also reduced its jurisdiction to a basic scrutiny of whether jus cogens was violated. The Court of First Instance's decisions can be criticised on various grounds. First, the application of these Articles is contrary to the wording of the Treaty and the case-law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ). Further, as a consequence of the Court of First Instance's judgments, decisions of the UN Sanctions Committee become the supreme law within the EU, provided they meet the requirements of jus cogens as defined by the Court of First Instance. In addition, the individual is deprived of all fundamental rights guaranteed under European law. [source] Citizenship of the European Union,A Legal AnalysisEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 5 2007Francis G. Jacobs This concept was considered by some to be embryonic in the original Community Treaties, but was first expressly incorporated into the Treaties by the Treaty on European Union, signed at Maastricht on 7 February 1992. In the case-law of the European Court of Justice, which has given citizenship a content going beyond the express Treaty provisions, the concept is closely related to other basic concepts, including free movement of persons, the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality and the protection of fundamental rights. This article seeks to review the case-law, to disentangle citizenship from other related concepts, and to determine what added value citizenship has brought to the Treaties and what the potential and the proper limits of the concept might be. [source] The State of Gender Equality Law in the European UnionEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 2 2007Annick Masselot As a fundamental right, the principle of gender equality is to apply in all areas of EU law. Its scope has been extended to the access to and supply of goods and services and, according to the European Court of Justice, to the Third Pillar. Despite efforts to render the principle visible and accessible, a number of provisions remain unclear and contradictory. The contribution of external actors in this field is set to help safeguarding and enhancing the Community gender equality acquis. [source] What Does Free Movement Mean in Theory and Practice in an Enlarged EU?EUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 6 2005Sergio Carrera The right to move freely represents one of the fundamental freedoms of the internal market as well as an essential political element of the package of rights linked to the very status of EU citizenship. The scope ratione personae and the current state of the principle of free movement of persons is assessed by looking at the most recent case law of the Court of Justice and the recently adopted Directive on the rights of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States. But what are the hidden and visible obstacles to free movement of persons in Europe? How can these barriers be overcome to make free movement and residence rights more inclusive? This article addresses these issues along with the following questions: Who are the beneficiaries of the free movement of persons in an enlarged Europe? What is the impact of the recent legal developments in the freedom of movement dimension, such as the European Court of Justice case law and the new Directive? And to what extent are pro-security policies such as the Schengen Information System II and an enhanced interoperability between European databases fully compatible with the freedom of movement paradigm? [source] Looking for Coherence within the European Community*EUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 2 2005Stefano Bertea It focuses on a specific dimension of this relationship and shows how the appeals to coherence made by the European Court of Justice have shaped a particular branch of the European legal order, namely, the judicial review of Community acts. The analysis of the Court of Justice's case law in this field shows that in its extensive use of coherence the Court of Justice explored and brought into play different types of coherence and, while it failed to distinguish between them, it made use of sorts of coherence that thus far legal theorists have disregarded. The article concludes that a closer collaboration between legal theory and legal practice would be profitable for both legal theorists and Community law specialists. [source] Maximum Residue Limits of Veterinary Medicinal Products and Their Regulation in European Community LawEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 2 2003Robert Ancuceanu This paper proposes a legal analysis of a legal and empirical tool (maximum residue limits (MRLs)) designed to protect the consumers of animal foodstuffs, as it is regulated in European Community law. After introducing the concept of MRLs in its legal context, MRLs are defined and the need for harmonisation in this field is explained. Then the main rules governing the establishment of MRLs at a Europe-wide level are expounded, an important place being devoted to some problems occurred in the cases decided by the European Court of Justice: is it possible to establish an MRL only for certain therapeutic indications? What about the intention of placing on the market in the establishment of an MRL? Is the procedure for the establishment of MRLs a tight or lax one? The answer to some of these questions involves more general aspects of European Community law. [source] The General Provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European UnionEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 4 2002R. Alonso García The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provides the Union with a ,more evident' (as the European Council of Cologne asked for) framework of protection of the individuals before the public authorities within the European context, after more than thirty years (since the Stauder Case) of full confidence in the leading role played by the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Communities. This new normative catalogue of fundamental rights (included the so called ,aspirational fundamental rights') implies one more instrument of protection which has to find its own place with regard to the protection afforded by the national Constitutions and the international agreements on human rights, particularly the European Convention on Human Rights, which are already a privileged source of inspiration for Court of Justice of the European Communities. It is the main objective of the General Provisions of the Charter to clarify which is that place and the relationship with those other levels of protection as managed by their supreme interpreters (i.e., the Constitutional,or Supreme,Courts of the Member States of the Union and the European Court of Human Rights). [source] Constitutions, Constitutionalism, and the European UnionEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 2 2001Paul Craig The institutional reforms of the EU, coupled with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, have fuelled the debate about a European Constitution. This paper begins by examining the nature of constitutions and constitutionalism. The focus then turns to the EU itself. It is argued that the Community has indeed been transformed into a constitutional legal order, and that the arguments to the contrary are not convincing. This does not however mean that the EU has, or should have, a European Constitution cognisable as such which draws together the constitutional articles of the Treaties, together with the constitutional principles articulated by the European Court of Justice. The difficulties with this strategy are examined in detail, and the conclusion is that we should not at present pursue this course. It would be better to draw on the valuable work done by the European University Institute in its recent study in order to simplify and consolidate the Treaties. [source] Free movement, equal treatment and workers' rights: can the European Union solve its trilemma of fundamental principles?INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS JOURNAL, Issue 6 2009Jon Erik Dølvik ABSTRACT This article analyses the trilemma the EU is facing concerning three fundamental principles on which the Community rests: free movement of services and labour; non-discrimination and equal treatment, and the rights of association and industrial action. With rising cross-border flows of services and (posted) labour after the Eastward enlargement, the conflict between these rights has triggered industrial disputes and judicial strife. In the view of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), highlighted in the Laval Quartet, some principles are more fundamental than others. Tracing the ,dual track' along which European integration has evolved, whereby supranational market integration has been combined with national semi-sovereignty in industrial relations and social policies, our claim is that the supremacy of free movement over basic social rights implied by the ECJ judgments is leading Europe in a politically and socially unsustainable direction. To prevent erosion of the European Social Models and of popular support for European integration, the politicians have to reinsert themselves into the governance of the European project. A pertinent start would be to ensure that the rising mass of cross-border service workers in Europe become subject to the same rights and standards as their fellow workers in the emerging pan-European labour market. [source] Sex equality and social security: Selected rulings of the European Court of JusticeINTERNATIONAL LABOUR REVIEW, Issue 4 2004Ingeborg HEIDE First page of article [source] Dispute resolution in federal systemsINTERNATIONAL SOCIAL SCIENCE JOURNAL, Issue 167 2001Michael Crommelin This article deals selectively with four broad approaches to conflict management in federal systems of government: formal dispute resolution,informal dispute resolution, dispute avoidance, and popular dispute resolution. Courts undertake the task of formal dispute resolution through judicial review: issues of current significance include judicial concepts of federalism, the reference jurisdiction, Scottish devolution, and supranational federalism and the European Court of Justice. Examples of informal dispute resolution are few. The South African Constitution includes a provision, requiring parties to an intergovernmental dispute to exhaust all other remedies before resorting to litigation. The dispute resolution process contained in chapter 20 of the North American Free Trade Agreement may stimulate experimentation with similar models in federal systems. Dispute avoidance techniques are many and varied; they include the drafting of constitutional instruments and the use of intergovernmental forums within and outside the constitutional framework. The electoral process may be employed in federal systems to determine the fate of governments, specific legislative measures and proposed constitutional amendments. Each federal society has its own culture of conflict management, which exerts a subtle but significant influence on the operation of, and the relationship among, dispute resolution systems. [source] ,Condemn a Little More, Understand a Little Less': The Political Context and Rights' Implications of the Domestic and European Rulings in the Venables-Thompson CaseJOURNAL OF LAW AND SOCIETY, Issue 3 2000Deena Haydon In 1993 Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were found guilty of the abduction and murder of two-year-old James Bulger. Aged ten at the time of the offence, the children were tried in an adult court before a judge and jury amidst a blaze of publicity. They were named by the trial judge and sentenced to detention at Her Majesty's Pleasure [HMp]. The Home Secretary set a minimum tariff of fifteen years imprisonment. In December 1999 the European Court of Human Rights held that, in the conduct of the trial and the fixing of the tariff, the United Kingdom government was responsible for violating the European Convention on Human Rights. This article maps how the case became a watershed in youth justice procedure and practice influencing Labour's proposals for reform and the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act. Examining the progression of appeals through the domestic and European courts, it explores the dichotomous philosophies separating the United Kingdom and European approaches to the age of criminal responsibility, the prosecution and punishment of children, and the influence of political policy on judicial decisions. Finally, the ,backlash' against ,threatening children', the affirmation of adult power and knowledge, and the implications of the European judgments in the context of a rights-based agenda are analysed. [source] The Logics of Supranational Human Rights Litigation, Official Acknowledgment, and Human Rights Reform: The Southeast Turkey Cases before the European Court of Human Rights, 1996,2006LAW & SOCIAL INQUIRY, Issue 2 2010ak Çal This article examines the domestic impact of supranational human rights litigation on acknowledgment of state violence in the context of macroprocesses of global governance. The article's argument is that the impact of supranational human rights litigation on the process of acknowledgment must be seen through counternarratives on state violence. The article undertakes a detailed textual analysis of the truth claims and denial strategies that emerged from the European Court of Human Rights proceedings on state violence during Turkey's struggle against the armed group the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). It assesses these in the context of the human rights reforms that were created following pressure from European-level governance processes. The article argues that attention must be paid to agency in acknowledgment and truth-telling processes, and points to the limits of technical-bureaucratic forms of human rights reform interventions in the context of state violence. [source] Constitutional responses to extremist political associations ,ETA, Batasuna and democratic normsLEGAL STUDIES, Issue 1 2008Ian Cram Systems of representative democracy require that the electorate be given at regular intervals the opportunity to replace the party in government with a rival political association. In this context, the right of individuals to freedom of association permits the formation of competitor parties and prevents forms of state intervention that might otherwise privilege existing office holders and their political programmes. It follows then that restrictions on the right to political association are deserving of particularly close scrutiny. At the same time, liberal democratic constitutions usually insist that participants in electoral process manifest a level of commitment to core liberal democratic norms (such as the rule of law, toleration, the equal worth of each individual and the peaceful resolution of grievances). In the case of intolerant, extremist parties that would reject some/most of these norms, the state may invoke a range of defensive measures up to and including proscription in order to safeguard democracy. This paper takes as its focus the constitutional issues raised by the banning in Spain of Batasuna , the political wing of ETA. A legal challenge to the ban is currently before the European Court of Human Rights. Making reference to work of John Rawls, this paper considers whether the ban on Batasuna is justifiable in terms of liberal political theory, before analysing the extent to which proscription conforms to international human rights law and European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence. [source] Osman and police immunity in the English law of tortsLEGAL STUDIES, Issue 3 2000Paula Giliker This article examines and questions the nature of police immunity from claims for negligence in the investigation and suppression of crime, as stated by the House of Lords in Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire. This issue has been discussed before the European Court of Human Rights in Osman v United Kingdom, where the court held that a blanket application of the immunity was contrary to art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This article will argue that this decision does not overturn the basic public policy principles for the immunity stated in Hill and that further examination of this area of law is required. It is submitted that if the law is considered in terms of proximity rather than in terms of public policy immunity, a clearer understanding of the principles underlying this area of law can be reached together with the desirable goal of removing the term ,immunity' from this area of law. [source] The Trial on Trial: Volume Three: Towards a Normative Theory of the Criminal Trial by A. Duff, L. Farmer, S. Marshall and V. Tadros (Eds.) and Fair Trials: The European Criminal Procedural Tradition and the European Court of Human Rights by S.J. SummersTHE HOWARD JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, Issue 1 2010NICOLA PADFIELD No abstract is available for this article. [source] Prisoners as Citizens in a DemocracyTHE HOWARD JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, Issue 2 2008DEBORAH CHENEY A number of approaches are adopted by governments of the Council of Europe and the UK is one of 13 member states which operate a blanket ban on prisoners voting. Following a European Court of Human Rights judgment in 2006, the UK is now obliged to review this policy which has been held to breach an individual's right to contribute to free elections. The options open to the UK are to retain prisoner disenfranchisement or enfranchise certain serving prisoners based on criteria such as sentence length and offence seriousness. [source] Denying Foreign State Immunity on the Grounds of the Unavailability of Alternative MeansTHE MODERN LAW REVIEW, Issue 5 2008Article first published online: 21 AUG 200, Mizushima Tomonori Granting immunity from suit to a foreign state or an international organisation, deprives the plaintiff of access to court and appears incompatible with the rule of law. Since the European Court of Human Rights judgment in Waite v Germany (1999), the availability of alternative means for dispute settlement has been emphasised in the context of international organisation immunity. However in the case of foreign state immunity, this approach was not taken by the European Court of Human Rights in Al-Adsani v United Kingdom (2001) nor by the House of Lords in Jones v Ministry of the Interior of Saudi Arabia (2006). Likewise, foreign state immunity would be granted under the UN State Immunity Convention of 2004, regardless of whether there are alternative means. This Convention, rather than enhancing the rule of law, could lead to its attenuation. That several of these cases involve immunity in cases of torture sharpens their sensitivity. [source] The Enjoyment of Rights and Freedoms: A New Conception of the ,Ambit' under Article 14 ECHRTHE MODERN LAW REVIEW, Issue 5 2006Aaron Baker, Article first published online: 16 AUG 200 Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as applied by the UK judiciary under the Human Rights Act 1998, is in danger of becoming as ,parasitic' as it is often described. Judges have inappropriately narrowed the scope of the ,ambit' of other Convention articles, and thus limited the number of claims to which Article 14 can apply, by defining it according to considerations more properly weighed in a justification analysis incorporating proportionality. The emerging approach departs from Strasbourg jurisprudence, and fails to give full effect to the language and intent of Article 14. This trend need not continue. This article begins the process of fashioning a new conception of the ambit of Convention articles: one that could change the fortunes of Article 14 cases in the UK, but that flows naturally from the precedents of the European Court of Human Rights, and gives effect to the spirit of the HRA. [source] The Effect of Human Rights on Criminal Evidentiary Processes: Towards Convergence, Divergence or Realignment?THE MODERN LAW REVIEW, Issue 5 2005Article first published online: 17 AUG 200, John D. Jackson This article examines the contribution which the European Court of Human Rights has made to the development of common evidentiary processes across the common law and civil law systems of criminal procedure in Europe. It is argued that the continuing use of terms such as ,adversarial' and ,inquisitorial' to describe models of criminal proof and procedure has obscured the genuinely transformative nature of the Court's jurisprudence. It is shown that over a number of years the Court has been steadily developing a new model of proof that is better characterised as ,participatory' than as ,adversarial' or ,inquisitorial'. Instead of leading towards a convergence of existing ,adversarial' and ,inquisitorial' models of proof, this is more likely to lead towards a realignment of existing processes of proof which nonetheless allows plenty of scope for diverse application in different institutional and cultural settings. [source] Assuring Real Freedom of Movement in EU Direct TaxationTHE MODERN LAW REVIEW, Issue 6 2000Ian Roxan The decisions of the European Court of Justice in applying the Treaty principles of freedom of movement to the direct taxation of individuals have been strongly criticised as taking an overly simplistic view of the interactions between national tax systems. The interactions often make non-discrimination an inappropriate criterion. This article proposes a framework, grounded in economic analysis, for understanding the implications of the interactions for freedom of movement. First, I establish a precise definition of obstacles to freedom of movement of individuals as costs of migration, as distinguished from incentives to migration (such as mere differences in national tax levels). Incentives can encourage economic distortions in migration, but they are not obstacles to migration (or free movement). Secondly, I develop the cross-migration test to distinguish costs of migration from incentives. I apply the test to show that two commonly used schemes of double tax relief, including exemption with progression, create unjustified obstacles to free movement. [source] Sexual Orientation Discrimination after Grant v South-West TrainsTHE MODERN LAW REVIEW, Issue 5 2000Nicholas Bamforth In Grant v South-West Trains [1998] ECR I-621, the European Court of Justice implied that, as a general matter, discrimination against an employee on the ground of sexual orientation did not violate Article 141 EC. This article argues that Grant rests on shaky foundations, in that it is conceptually inconsistent with the Court's earlier decision in P v S and Cornwall County Council [1996] ECR I-2143. Furthermore, the scope of Grant has since been qualified by decisions of the European Court of Human Rights , decisions which may well have undermined the status of the case more broadly. However these difficulties are ultimately resolved, the Court of Justice's treatment of sexual orientation discrimination exposes flaws in its approach as a self-proclaimed constitutional court. [source] The European Judicial Organisation in a New Paradigm: The Influence of Principles of ,New Public Management' on the Organisation of the European CourtsEUROPEAN LAW JOURNAL, Issue 6 2008Elaine Mak Recent reforms regarding the European Courts raise the question in which way do ,new public management' principles influence the European judicial organisation and how is a balance struck between these principles and classic ,rule of law' principles? The article first presents a classification of these types of principles in the framework for discussion regarding the European judicial organisation. Starting out from two paradigms, an inquiry is made into the status of the two sets of principles in the present-day European ,constitutional' framework. Second, the interaction of principles is investigated with regard to a number of current dilemmas, including the demarcation of the judicial domain, the management of the Courts and the distribution of judicial competences. [source] ,Condemn a Little More, Understand a Little Less': The Political Context and Rights' Implications of the Domestic and European Rulings in the Venables-Thompson CaseJOURNAL OF LAW AND SOCIETY, Issue 3 2000Deena Haydon In 1993 Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were found guilty of the abduction and murder of two-year-old James Bulger. Aged ten at the time of the offence, the children were tried in an adult court before a judge and jury amidst a blaze of publicity. They were named by the trial judge and sentenced to detention at Her Majesty's Pleasure [HMp]. The Home Secretary set a minimum tariff of fifteen years imprisonment. In December 1999 the European Court of Human Rights held that, in the conduct of the trial and the fixing of the tariff, the United Kingdom government was responsible for violating the European Convention on Human Rights. This article maps how the case became a watershed in youth justice procedure and practice influencing Labour's proposals for reform and the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act. Examining the progression of appeals through the domestic and European courts, it explores the dichotomous philosophies separating the United Kingdom and European approaches to the age of criminal responsibility, the prosecution and punishment of children, and the influence of political policy on judicial decisions. Finally, the ,backlash' against ,threatening children', the affirmation of adult power and knowledge, and the implications of the European judgments in the context of a rights-based agenda are analysed. [source] | |||||||||||||