Recently some very interesting articles have been published regarding the practice of the ECtHR.
The latest European Journal of Health Law contains the article "A New Approach to Sex-Based Classifications in the Context of Procreative Rights: S.H. and Others v. Austria" by Mike Sanderson. The abstract is as follows:
A critical discussion of the recent First Section and Grand Chamber judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of S.H. and Others v. Austria, which upheld an Austrian ban on in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) using donor gametes (ova and sperm). The author argues that the regulatory regime adopted by Austria is overbroad insofar as the regime it adopts fails to accurately reflect the legitimate interests of the state. This is not a conventional “controversial morals” case where, in the absence of a clear moral and/or policy consensus among the Council of Europe member states, states are properly accorded a wide margin of appreciation. The regime adopted by Austria embodies a clear sex bias (with their respective gametes standing as near perfect proxies for the sex of the applicants) with exceptions being made to address male infertility while leaving women without medical remedy. As such, the margin of appreciation should be significantly restricted and the classifications embodied by the regime subject to the highest possible scrutiny.
In the Quaderni di Diritto Mercato Tecnologia you can find a paper from Gregor Puppinck titled "The Case of Costa and Pavan v. Italy and the Convergence between Human Rights and Biotechnologies. Commentary on the ECHR ruling on Costa and Pavan v. Italy, No. 54270/10, 28th August 2012". Here is the abstract:
This article serves as an introduction to this special edition of the Irish Journal of Legal Studies on the recent developments on abortion law in Ireland. It briefly explains what were the two main drivers behind the introduction of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013, namely the European Court of Human Right’s judgment against Ireland in the case of A., B. & C. v. Ireland, no. 25579/05 [2010] E.C.H.R. 2032 (16 December 2010) and the untimely death of Savita Halappanavar. It then reviews a series of public hearings, heard by the Joint Committee on Health and Children in January and May 2013, on how to best meet Ireland’s obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights and under the Constitution. Finally it details the genesis of this special edition and introduces the work of the contributors.
Finally, the Irish Journal of Legal Studies published the article "Article 40.3.3 and the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013: The Impetus for, and Process of, Legislative Change" from Catherine O'Sullivan, Jennifer Schweppe and Eimear A. Spain. This is the abstract:
This article serves as an introduction to this special edition of the Irish Journal of Legal Studies on the recent developments on abortion law in Ireland. It briefly explains what were the two main drivers behind the introduction of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013, namely the European Court of Human Right’s judgment against Ireland in the case of A., B. & C. v. Ireland, no. 25579/05 [2010] E.C.H.R. 2032 (16 December 2010) and the untimely death of Savita Halappanavar. It then reviews a series of public hearings, heard by the Joint Committee on Health and Children in January and May 2013, on how to best meet Ireland’s obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights and under the Constitution. Finally it details the genesis of this special edition and introduces the work of the contributors.
No comments:
Post a Comment