This thesis seeks to investigate whether the current European Court of Human Rights case-law on assisted suicide can be justified using Kantian or Utilitarian arguments. The theory, consisting of Utilitarianism and Kantianism, is applied to three key cases arguing a right to assisted suicide under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights; Pretty v. the United Kingdom, Haas v. Switzerland and Koch v. Germany. Using argumentation analysis, arguments based on the case-law in combination with the two theories are presented and discussed. In a discussion centered around concepts such as autonomy, utility and rationality, the thesis concludes that the two theories are indeed useful in justifying the case-law on assisted suicide. The observation that the two theories can justify the same actions on different grounds concludes the essay, before ideas encouraging future research are presented.

Den europeiska domstolen för mänskliga rättigheter har tagit upp ett mål om tvångsarbete där de klargjort att en arbetsrelation kan utgöra tvångsarbete även om arbetaren initialt accepterat arbetsvillkoren om det finns exploaterande element. I uppsatsen används idé- och argumentationsanalys för att analysera domslutet genom applicering Iris Marion Youngs teori om fem ansikten av förtryck för att utröna om domstolens argumentation uppnår en nivå av moral i linje med teorin. Uppsatsen klargör bland annat, vikten av att domstolen sett till offrens hela livssituation från ett helhetsperspektiv och att de ansträngt sig att sätta sig in i sådant strukturellt förtryck som ofta är dolt i vardagliga beteenden. Uppsatsen visar att domslutet genom sitt tillvägagångssätt på ett tillfredställande sätt kunnat visa på förekomst av förtryck som annars kunde ha passerat ostraffat, och att motiven i beslutet utgår ifrån en moralisk grund i paritet med teorin. Argumentationen kunde dock ha innehållit en mer mångfacetterad beskrivning av strukturellt förtyck och dess konsekvenser på den sociala gruppen. / The European Court of Human Rights has made a judgement in favor of the workers in a case of forced labor in which they clarify that a working relationship can constitute forced labor even if the worker initially has accepted the working conditions if there are elements of exploitation. In this essay idea and argumentation analysis are used to analyze the judgement through the eyes of Iris Marion Youngs normative theory of the five faces of oppression, to explore if the courts argumentation reaches a moral standard in line with the theory. The essay reveals among other things, that an effort to explore the life situation of victims from a holistic perspective were crucial in the judicial process, as well as an effort to understand structural oppression hidden in the everyday life. The conclusions show that the judgment meets many aspects of Youngs theory in revealing oppression and giving arguments in line with its moral grounds. However, the argumentation could have been even more versatile around issues of structural oppression and consequences thereof on the social group.

An embedded case study investigating the ongoing securitization of migration in the EU from 2014-2020 and the role of legal institutions, in this case the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in these processes. Securitization Theory is used in combination with Critical Legal Theory to create a framework that attempts to both illuminate the role of the functional actor in Securitization Theory further, and the impact securitization has on legal institutions. It provides explanations for sudden shifts in legal argumentation, especially in cases of high political relevance with the use of Critical Legal Theory. The case of N.D. & N.T. vs. Spain serves as an example of a functional actor providing two contrasting judgments on the same events within a short period of time and opens up discussions about political influences on legal institutions. Securitization and the framing of refugees as existential threats to European identity and culture is one of the many ongoing political processes related to the issue of migration and refuge in Europe. As the political landscape shifts and right-wing populist parties establish themselves in European Member States, illegal pushbacks have become common practice at the outer borders of the EU and are challenged both politically and legally. This study investigated cases of illegal pushbacks to renew criticism against the institutions engaging in and enabling the practice.

S’il est compréhensible que la multiplicité des angles d’analyse revient à exclure toute définition unique ou récapitulative de la famille, cela n’interdit pas pour autant d’essayer de saisir cette réalité qu’est la famille. Compte tenu de l’intérêt grandissant de l'UE pour la famille, l'UE a été choisie comme cadre d’étude de notre recherche consacrée à la famille européenne ("f.e"). Or, l'UE est à la fois un espace géographique composé de 28 Etats membres et une entité à part entière dotée de la personnalité juridique, donc mener une réflexion sur la f.e. au sein de l'UE impose de l’engager à la fois dans les Etats membres de l'UE et dans l'UE elle-même.Si on ne peut pas définir la f.e., peut-on à tout le moins l’appréhender, c’est-à-dire la saisir par l’esprit ? C’est ce que nous faisons en mettant en perspective les différentes approches de la f.e. retenues par les différents ordres juridiques qui interviennent au sein de l'UE.Nous nous intéressons à ce qu’est la f.e. dans les faits et en tant qu’objet juridique en étudiant les différentes façons dont elle est modelée par les droits. Les différents droits de la famille des Etats membres de l’UE ainsi que les différentes interventions de l'UE en matière familiale sont pour nous autant de moyens d’appréhender la f.e. nous permettant de révéler l’existence de points de convergence et de valeurs communes. Mais notre recherche ne peut faire fi de l’existence d’une Europe bicéphale car la conception que l'UE a de la famille est enrichie par la jurisprudence de la Cour EDH et reste en devenir par l’héritage qu’elle reçoit de la construction du sens de la notion de « vie familiale » par la jurisprudence de la Cour EDH. / If it is understandable that the multiplicity of angles of analysis amounts to exclude any single or summary definition of the family, this does not preclude trying to grasp this reality that the family is. Given the growing interest of the European Union (E.U) for the family, the E.U has been selected as the study framework of our research on the European family. Since the E.U is both a geographical area composed of twenty- eight Member States and an entity with legal personality, reflect on the European family in the European Union requires to do it in both members States of the E.U and the E.U itself.If we can’t define the European family, can we at least apprehend it, that is to grasp it by the spirit ? This is what we decided to do by putting in perspective the different approaches of the European family adopted by the different legal systems involved in the E.U.We need to focus our attention both on what the European family is in fact and as a legal object by studying the different ways it is modeled by laws. The various family laws of the Member States of the E.U and the various interventions of the E.U in family matters are so many means for us to apprehend the European family allowing us to reveal the existence of points of convergence and common values. But the research on the European family conducted in the E.U framework can’t ignore the existence of a bicephalous Europe because the conception that the E.U has of family is enriched by the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human rights ( ECtHR ) and remains in become given the legacy it receives from the construction of the meaning of the notion of "family life" in the case law of the ECtHR .

L'une des critiques fondamentales adressées au mécanisme de contrôle et de surveillance de la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme en matière électorale tient au risque qu'il portera atteinte à la souveraineté de l'État. En effet, certains auteurs estiment que l'autonomie constitutionnelle de l'État dans le domaine électoral, jusqu'à tout récemment strictement protégée, s'affaiblit sous l'influence de la protection des droits de l'homme dans le système européen. Le présent mémoire a pour but de déterminer les conditions imposées aux autorités étatiques par la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme en vue d'assurer l'exercice efficace du droit à des élections libres. Ensuite, il analysera les effets de ces conditions sur la souveraineté des États parties à la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme. Notre étude s'intéresse, dans un premier temps, à l'examen du principe de la souveraineté de l'État et de son évolution progressive sous l'influence des droits de l'homme. Dans un deuxième temps, elle présentera le droit à des élections libres et ses manifestations théoriques et jurisprudentielles. L'étude des affaires tranchées par la Cour européenne permettra de remarquer que la déférence qui est accordée à la souveraineté des États s'accompagne d'une certaine limitation de la marge d'appréciation des autorités étatiques en cas de privation de l'exercice efficace du droit à des élections libres. Ensuite, les acquis théoriques et conceptuels seront appliqués à l'étude des restrictions électorales relevant des mesures législatives, administratives et judiciaires des États ainsi que des conditions imposées par la Cour européenne. À cet égard, l'analyse de ces conditions nous permettra de saisir l'étendue de la limitation de la liberté d'action des États en matière électorale. Cette recension analytique nous permettra de conclure que le mécanisme de contrôle de la Cour européenne entraîne de multiples effets limitatifs sur la souveraineté des États. / One of the fundamental criticisms levelled at the ECtHR review mechanism relates to the fact that it is jeopardizing State's sovereignty. According to some commentators the State's constitutional autonomy, untill recently strictly preserved under international law, is now questioned as a result of the international protection of human rights. This study aims to identify the link between the principle of State sovereignty, the guarantee of the electoral rights, and the role of the ECtHR. Our study will be divided into three chapters. Chapter l, "Progressive evolution of the principle of State sovereignty and the European mechanism for the protection of fundamental human rights", discusses the principle of State sovereignty and its interpretations in contemporary international law. The chapter traces the evolution of the principle and links it with the progressive development of fundamental human rights. Chapter II, "The interaction between the State's margin of appreciation and the European supervisory mechanism", considers what role the positive obligations of States may have played in the crystallization of States' attitudes towards the application of international human rights instruments. After a brief discussion of the doctrine of the margin of appreciation and States' obligations under the European Convention, the chapter focuses on the ECtHR's control and supervision of the States' electoral restrictions. Chapter III, "Electoral restrictions and the scope of limits imposed on the State sovereignty", is central to our study. This chapter examines the ECtHR case-Iaw on electoral rights (1987-2008) and draws attention to some electoral restrictions in legislative, administrative and judicial matters. This study looks at the challenges which surround the application of the right to free elections, focusing on electoral rights in national political discourse, and the development of the ECtHR's enhanced role in protecting electoral rights in Europe. It draws conclusions as to the relationships between the development of an effective protection of electoral rights and the resultant limitations to the State sovereignty.

L'une des critiques fondamentales adressées au mécanisme de contrôle et de surveillance de la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme en matière électorale tient au risque qu'il portera atteinte à la souveraineté de l'État. En effet, certains auteurs estiment que l'autonomie constitutionnelle de l'État dans le domaine électoral, jusqu'à tout récemment strictement protégée, s'affaiblit sous l'influence de la protection des droits de l'homme dans le système européen. Le présent mémoire a pour but de déterminer les conditions imposées aux autorités étatiques par la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme en vue d'assurer l'exercice efficace du droit à des élections libres. Ensuite, il analysera les effets de ces conditions sur la souveraineté des États parties à la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme. Notre étude s'intéresse, dans un premier temps, à l'examen du principe de la souveraineté de l'État et de son évolution progressive sous l'influence des droits de l'homme. Dans un deuxième temps, elle présentera le droit à des élections libres et ses manifestations théoriques et jurisprudentielles. L'étude des affaires tranchées par la Cour européenne permettra de remarquer que la déférence qui est accordée à la souveraineté des États s'accompagne d'une certaine limitation de la marge d'appréciation des autorités étatiques en cas de privation de l'exercice efficace du droit à des élections libres. Ensuite, les acquis théoriques et conceptuels seront appliqués à l'étude des restrictions électorales relevant des mesures législatives, administratives et judiciaires des États ainsi que des conditions imposées par la Cour européenne. À cet égard, l'analyse de ces conditions nous permettra de saisir l'étendue de la limitation de la liberté d'action des États en matière électorale. Cette recension analytique nous permettra de conclure que le mécanisme de contrôle de la Cour européenne entraîne de multiples effets limitatifs sur la souveraineté des États. / One of the fundamental criticisms levelled at the ECtHR review mechanism relates to the fact that it is jeopardizing State's sovereignty. According to some commentators the State's constitutional autonomy, untill recently strictly preserved under international law, is now questioned as a result of the international protection of human rights. This study aims to identify the link between the principle of State sovereignty, the guarantee of the electoral rights, and the role of the ECtHR. Our study will be divided into three chapters. Chapter l, "Progressive evolution of the principle of State sovereignty and the European mechanism for the protection of fundamental human rights", discusses the principle of State sovereignty and its interpretations in contemporary international law. The chapter traces the evolution of the principle and links it with the progressive development of fundamental human rights. Chapter II, "The interaction between the State's margin of appreciation and the European supervisory mechanism", considers what role the positive obligations of States may have played in the crystallization of States' attitudes towards the application of international human rights instruments. After a brief discussion of the doctrine of the margin of appreciation and States' obligations under the European Convention, the chapter focuses on the ECtHR's control and supervision of the States' electoral restrictions. Chapter III, "Electoral restrictions and the scope of limits imposed on the State sovereignty", is central to our study. This chapter examines the ECtHR case-Iaw on electoral rights (1987-2008) and draws attention to some electoral restrictions in legislative, administrative and judicial matters. This study looks at the challenges which surround the application of the right to free elections, focusing on electoral rights in national political discourse, and the development of the ECtHR's enhanced role in protecting electoral rights in Europe. It draws conclusions as to the relationships between the development of an effective protection of electoral rights and the resultant limitations to the State sovereignty.

In this thesis, the legal theory of Robert Cover is employed to analyse the procedural turn of the ECtHR. The text studies how Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom (ADI) and subsequent case law relate to the margin of appreciation doctrine and how this can be understood from a Coverian point of view. The margin of appreciation is thus seen as a product of an interplay between paideic and imperial forces where the imperial, or world-maintaining, influences on the doctrine are the strongest. ADI and later cases are read as further accentuating the focus on the nomos of the state relative to competing nomoi already at work in the case law of the procedural turn. The thesis is closed with an amalgamation of Cover’s ideas with the democratic theory of Jacques Derrida which results in a discussion on what a Coverian re-evaluation of the approach outlined in ADI could look like.

In the early 1990s the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicted that the gravest effects of climate change could be on human migration, as millions would be displaced by coastal erosion, flooding, and drought. Today, this is considered a reality that is coming ever closer. Yet, there are currently no binding international frameworks dedicated to the issue of climate induced migration. In addition, the current regime of international refugee law is woefully inadequate at responding to the issue. Individuals that do not fall under the refugee definition are thus commonly left with the general scope of international human rights law standards, so-called complementary protection.   On these premises, this thesis sets out to examine the circumstances under which the non-refoulement principle in international human rights law could be applied in the context of climate change effects and especially slow onset processes, and how the principle could potentially be developed. Principally through examining jurisprudence concerning the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, this thesis finds that while there is a possibility for non-refoulement obligations to arise due to the effects of climate change, the precise scope of such protection is unclear. Although case law has emerged and continues to do so, the complex nature of climate induced migration and the undeveloped jurisprudence on this issue leaves important questions unanswered. This thesis finds that there seems to be no obvious response to the question whether climate change is a relevant factor in the legal analysis of non-refoulement claims, and whether it should be. Furthermore, there are great challenges in discerning the required intensity of harm for the threshold to be met and protection to be granted. In addition, this thesis finds that applying the non-refoulement principle in the context of slow onset processes entails several difficulties, particularly concerning the timing and prediction of the harm. It is therefore concluded that, as long as there is no framework dedicated to the issue of climate induced migration, clarity will be much needed in case law as to the scope of non-refoulement obligations in the context of, especially, slow onset processes due to climate change.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, European states have taken numerous measures to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. Several states have introduced various forms of compulsory vaccination against COVID-19. While vaccines are one of the most effective tools for protecting people against COVID-19, it raises the question to which extent states may justifiably make vaccination schemes compulsory in the pursuit of public health. This paper, therefore, analyses the compatibility between compulsory vaccination and the right to respect for private life as set out in Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the ECHR). As of today, the European Court of Human Rights (the ECtHR) has not decided whether vaccine mandates are compatible with the right to respect for private life.  An interference in the right to respect for private life must be in accordance with the law and fulfil one of the legitimate aims that are set out in Article 8.2 of the ECHR. An interference also needs to be necessary in a democratic society in order to achieve that legitimate aim. The protection of health as well as the protection of the rights and freedoms of others are two of the legitimate aims stipulated in Article 8 of the ECHR that are relevant in relation to the introduction of compulsory vaccination in society. In assessing whether an interference is necessary in a democratic society, the states enjoy a certain margin of appreciation. However, their assessment remains subject to review by the ECtHR. The principle of proportionality is an important part in assessing whether the interference has been necessary in a democratic society or not. The interference in question must remain proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. In this paper, the compatibility between compulsory COVID-19 vaccination and the right to respect for private life is examined primarily by analysing prior case law of the ECtHR concerning vaccination and other medical interventions. This paper concludes that the states enjoy a wide margin of appreciation when assessing the necessity of introducing compulsory COVID-19 vaccinations, mainly because of the lack of European consensus regarding such vaccination schemes. Furthermore, it is concluded that compulsory COVID-19 vaccinations can be compatible with the right to respect for private life as set out in Article 8 of the ECHR, provided that the vaccines are considered safe and efficient by the research community, the vaccines used are monitored and the vaccine mandate is only indirectly imposed by sanctions of a protective nature. In addition, necessary precautions must be taken by prior assessment of potential contraindications and there must exist a possibility to receive compensation as a result of potential injuries caused by the vaccine.