Abstract
This piece addresses the highly significant and current area of the human rights implications of the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing specifically on the new jurisprudence emerging from the European Court of Human Rights. During the pandemic, States had a duty to protect the lives of their citizens, and adopted a range of measures with this aim. However, questions arise concerning the extent to which other rights were restricted, and whether an appropriate balance was struck. Such issues give rise to complex questions, as is acutely demonstrated by the fact that Communauté Genevoise D’Action Syndicale (CGAS) v Switzerland, one of the earliest cases relating to the restrictions put in place by a State in response to the pandemic in which the Court issued a judgment on the merits, was referred to the Grand Chamber which adopted a dramatically different approach from that of the Chamber, which itself had been sharply divided. Overall, the piece argues that in order to preserve the legitimacy of human rights law, the Court must remain cautious of finding breaches of the European Convention on Human Rights in cases involving public restrictions applied for the purpose of protecting life and health in response to a global pandemic.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | European Yearbook on Human Rights 2024 |
Editors | Philip Czech, Lisa Heschl, Gerd Oberleitner, Karin Lukas, Manfred Nowak |
Publisher | Brill |
ISBN (Electronic) | 9789004708389 |
ISBN (Print) | 9789004708372 |
Publication status | Published - 18 Mar 2025 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The COVID-19 pandemic and the European Court of Human Rights: The Grand Chamber decision in Communaute Genevoise D'Action Syndicale (CGAS) v Switzerland'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Student theses
-
How effective is international Human Rights Law? A case study of domestic violence in the United Kingdom
McQuigg, R. (Author), Jul 2006Student thesis: Doctoral Thesis › Doctor of Philosophy
File