{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02702702702702703, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010395010395010396, 'mean_word_length': 5.551020408163265, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evolutive Interpretation in the Light of Other International Instruments

This chapter discusses how the European Court of Human Rights uses international instruments in its evolutive interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights. It is argued that the Court, in its use of such instruments, goes beyond the bounds of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Article 31(3)(b) (subsequent practice) and (c) (systemic interpretation) and uses the instruments as guidance in giving effect to the original intention of the parties based on Article 31(1) (evolutive intention). However, this is not made clear in the Court’s reasoning. Moreover, the Court prefers extensive discretion in how it should use such instruments in its evolutive interpretation. This makes the Court vulnerable to allegations of extrajudicial approaches and activism. Therefore, certain guidelines for the interpretational use of international instruments are proposed.