Allocating human rights obligations in the ECHR

Raible, L. (2024) Allocating human rights obligations in the ECHR. Human Rights Law Review, 24(1), (doi: 10.1093/hrlr/ngad030) (Early Online Publication)

[img] Text
306796.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.



This article asks how to allocate human rights obligations stemming from the European Convention on Human Rights and defends an interpretivist account of human rights based on the values of integrity and equality to answer it. First, it considers the structure of rights and argues that human rights usually require a duty bearer who needs to be identified. Second, the article analyses interest-based theories of human rights and shows that they do not speak to the allocation of duties. Third, I argue that duties can only be allocated relying on a normative principle and that an interpretivist account of human rights allows for underlying values to be identified. Fourth, I show that these values should be understood to be integrity and equality. Finally, the article applies the framework to the judgment in Carter v Russia, showing that an explicitly normative account supplies principled distinctions where other approaches cannot.

Item Type:Articles
Keywords:European Convention on Human Rights, extraterritorial human rights obligations, human rights obligations of non-state actors, Carter v Russia, interpretivism.
Status:Early Online Publication
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:Raible, Dr Lea
Authors: Raible, L.
College/School:College of Social Sciences > School of Law
Journal Name:Human Rights Law Review
Publisher:Oxford University Press
ISSN (Online):1744-1021
Copyright Holders:Copyright: © The Author(s) [2023]
First Published:First published in Human Rights Law Review 24(1)
Publisher Policy:Reproduced under a Creative Commons licence

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record