Jan Campbell

 

Abstract: The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), drafted in 1950 and entered into force on 3 September 1953, is an international convention to protect human rights and political freedoms in Europe.

 

Given issues, like the absence of trust in geopolitics and international relations, ruthless competition between states and civilizations to name a few and which surround the topic, this paper will argue that the key fundamental human rights cannot be protetcted in absolute terms. The paper considers four reasons: 

 

1) The historical background. 2) The language aspect and the formulations. 3) The fact of non resolvable contradictions and paradoxes. 4) The non scientific origins of HR concepts. And two central arguments: 1) Judgments of ECHR as living instrument not formally bound by precedents, the position, trying to establish a legal certainty and foreseeability of rulings by not changing its jurisdiction without compelling reasons, the number of reasons of conflict with rights entrenched in other provisions of the Convention and last but not least the ECHR autonomous interpretation, allowing a protection much wider in scope than the protection offered under national law, lead practically to limitations of national souverenity.

 

2) The current geopolitical and geoeconomical environment which could be charaterized by the absence of trust, dialog, linear technological development, commonly accepted values and national interests, and the concept of human rights lacking scientific origin make any result of comparison of human rights of only limited and theroretical value (not quantifiable and of quality). Nevertheless, the result could be used in the future should a science theory dedicated to the conduct of peace – The Paxology as a complementary science theory to Clausewitz On War would be established and included into educational programms.

 

Key words: ECHR; HR in PRC; contradiction; paradox;pathological science; paxology.