Lifers before the European Court of Human Rights: Reasons for Concern and Disappointment
Lifer´s human rights are still far from being properly acknowledged by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Recent Grand Chamber judgments such as Vinter and others v. United Kingdom (2013), Murray v. The Netherlands (2016) and Hutchinson v. United Kingdom (2017) bring in some contradictions...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2018 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia |
| Repositorio: | e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNED |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:e-spacio.uned.es:20.500.14468/22749 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/22749 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | 56 Ciencias Jurídicas y Derecho European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) lifers life sentences human dignity right to hope criminal dangerousness public protection re-socialization |
| Sumario: | Lifer´s human rights are still far from being properly acknowledged by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Recent Grand Chamber judgments such as Vinter and others v. United Kingdom (2013), Murray v. The Netherlands (2016) and Hutchinson v. United Kingdom (2017) bring in some contradictions and inconsistencies that feature a rather poor and hypocritical defense of human dignity. Here is an attempt to explain some of these problems that call for a much more committed approach by the ECtHR in relation to those who might spend the rest of their life in prison. |
|---|