Britain used its six-month chairmanship of the Council of Europe two years ago to call for change, with David Cameron arguing the sheer volume of cases meant the very purpose of the court to prevent the most serious violations of human rights is under threat. Photograph: Jason Alden\/Bloomberg <\/p>\n
This weeks judgment by the European Court of Human Rights on a case brought by Irish woman Louise OKeeffe is the latest ruling by the court that could have deep implications for Irish law. <\/p>\n
Irish social history has been dotted with rulings by the Strasbourg-based court that have profoundly shaped the law of the land over the last 50 years. David Norriss landmark action against the State in 1979 led to the decriminalisation of homosexuality in Ireland. The more recent ABC abortion case, which found that the State was in breach of the Convention on Human Rights, exerted political pressure on the government to legislate for the X-case ruling. <\/p>\n
In the public response to the OKeeffe judgment, many commentators have coyly remarked that it took a European court to hold the State to account, welcoming the existence of an alternative legal avenue for citizens. <\/p>\n
Just as EU employment law is widely credited with advancing womens right to equal pay and conditions in Ireland during the 1970s and 1980s, Irelands obligations under European law have been viewed as a welcome instigator of Irelands move away from the entrenched social conservatism that characterised Irish identity post-independence. <\/p>\n
Valued ideal At a time when public support for Europe is fading, Irelands obligation to abide by rulings of higher courts is one of the few aspects of the European ideal that people value. <\/p>\n
Not so in Britain. Across the water, the European Court of Human Rights is being held up by Eurosceptics as another example of excessive European interference. <\/p>\n
Although not a European institution the European Court of Human Rights is attached to the Council of Europe, an assembly of 47 countries the ECHR has nonetheless become embroiled in Britains fraught relationship with Europe. <\/p>\n
The court is deeply unpopular with many Conservatives. British prime minister David Cameron criticised the institution at the Conservative Partys autumn conference, while justice secretary Chris Grayling declared last month the court had lost legitimacy. <\/p>\n
At issue is a series of judgments on criminals rights. A ruling dating from 2005 which states that prisoners have a right to vote and a separate judgment imposing restrictions on the deportation of foreign criminals have been strongly questioned by the British government. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
More: Britain used its six-month chairmanship of the Council of Europe two years ago to call for change, with David Cameron arguing the sheer volume of cases meant the very purpose of the court to prevent the most serious violations of human rights is under threat. Photograph: Jason Alden\/Bloomberg This weeks judgment by the European Court of Human Rights on a case brought by Irish woman Louise OKeeffe is the latest ruling by the court that could have deep implications for Irish law. Irish social history has been dotted with rulings by the Strasbourg-based court that have profoundly shaped the law of the land over the last 50 years. Continue reading
\nEurope Letter: European Court of Human Rights has profoundly shaped Irish law<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"