El margen de apreciación en el derecho humano a la vida: restricción de derechos y respuesta del Tribunal de Estrasburgo
The human right to life poses serious difficulties. The conflict between the right to life, the right to privacy and the protection of life itself, does not obtain a clear answer from the courts of rights. A balancing exercise that justifies the pro portionality of the restriction of the individual’...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | artigo |
| Data de publicação: | 2020 |
| País: | España |
| Recursos: | Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha |
| Repositório: | RUIdeRA. Repositorio Institucional de la UCLM |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ruidera.uclm.es:10578/44373 |
| Acesso em linha: | http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-52002020000200003 https://hdl.handle.net/10578/44373 |
| Access Level: | Acceso aberto |
| Palavra-chave: | Derecho a la vida European Court of Human Rights Life Margen de apreciación Private life Right to life Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos Vida Vida privada |
| Resumo: | The human right to life poses serious difficulties. The conflict between the right to life, the right to privacy and the protection of life itself, does not obtain a clear answer from the courts of rights. A balancing exercise that justifies the pro portionality of the restriction of the individual’s rights by some States is essential. The Strasbourg Court, guarantor of rights in Europe, faced with the complexity of giving a unanimous answer in a framework of diversity and lack of consen sus, resorts to the free margin of national appreciation. This doctrine allows the European Court to offer an open response that accommodates the different legal realities in Europe, although it marks certain insurmountable limits that safeguard the essential content of human rights, restraining a disproportionate ´pro-life´ le gal restriction. However, it plays on ambiguity by combining the prioritization of ´deep moral values´ over the European consensus, with a recent prioritization of the right of women to terminate their pregnancy in accordance with national law on conscientious objection by health workers, which could risk a pro-freedom ten dency (pro-abortion and, by extension, pro-euthanasia) in its jurisprudence |
|---|