Why the European Convention on Human Rights Remains Relevant Today

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was signed in 1950 and was one of the most significant consequences of the end of the wars and genocide in early 20th century Europe.

The main objective of this was to establish a shared standard of human rights protection across Europe to act as a supranational court to hold governments and entities accountable for breaches to human rights.

In today’s modern society, critics often dismiss the ECHR as an outdated and unpractical convention to tackle modern challenges faced by most European nations.

This essay will critically evaluate those criticisms and show how the ECHR is not only still relevant, but essential in the face of modern challenges. Its importance remains embedded in its ability to evolve with changing times and still provide safeguards against abuses of power by authoritarian and dictatorial forces that seek to infringe upon basic human rights.

A Living Instrument

One of the main reasons the ECHR continues to be very important is its dynamic interpretations. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has consistently described the Convention as a living instrument as its provisions are not fixed in the historical context of the early 1950s but are flexible enough to be interpreted in present-day contexts.

This important feature allows the Court to extend protections beyond the areas the original drafters in 1950 could have foreseen. For example, protecting basic LGBTQ+ rights, digital privacy and environmental protection.

This can be seen in Goodwin v United Kingdom [2002] when the ECtHR recognised the rights of transgender communities. By having this dynamic ability that transcends time, the ECHR maintains its contemporary relevance and therefore can respond to the challenges and problems of the twenty-first century world.

Safeguarding Democracy and the Rule of Law

The ECHR also has an important role in defending basic democracy and the rule of law during pressing times when both faced grave threats. Across parts of Europe, certain anti-democratic governments and administrations have sought to silence opposition by controlling the media and weaken judicial independence through illegitimate means.

The ECtHR provides a final line of defence and checks on these actions that ensure every individual still has a pathway to justice when all judicial remedies have failed to defend their rights. Even when governments complain about external interference, the very existence of the ECtHR restrains the governments by the very possibility of scrutinising their conduct. This safeguard is crucially important given the rise of authoritarian populism and democratic backsliding as seen in recent years.

Responding to New Challenges

Although the ECHR was written post-World War II, the principles are broad enough to address modern human rights challenges. These challenges include mass surveillance, migration crises and the regulation of artificial intelligence which all raise pressing concerns about the balance between basic human rights and state authority.

The ECtHR has begun to address these challenges which show that the Convention remains flexible enough to adapt to modern challenges. For instance, in Big Brother Watch v United Kingdom [2018], the Court scrutinised surveillance programmes and reinforced vital safeguards for privacy in the digital era we live in right now. This case proves how the Convention’s protection of rights transcends time to provide a framework for protecting freedoms in the modern era.

Continuing Challenges and Critiques

The ECHR is of course not without its own problems. States do often critique that it undermines sovereignty as it imposes a “foreign” judgment on domestic and internal issues.

The delays and backlogs at the ECtHR also weaken the system’s effectiveness as individuals sometimes need to wait for years before a decision is reached.

These critiques are relevant but they do not in any way infer irrelevance. Instead of that, they highlight the need to reform the ECHR so there can be continued building and improvement upon this framework for protecting basic human rights.

A system which provokes debate and controversy is a system that is still alive and functioning. It needs to be reformed, not scrapped due to its shortcomings as nothing can replace its vital function for now.

Last Word

The ECHR is born during a very different Europe when compared to Europe today. But its core function, which is to protect basic human rights and dignity, remains intact and consistent. ECHR’s adaptability and its check on state power continues to foster a shared European standard of respect for every human being that walks the face of the Earth.