Prague Constitutional Seminar Series: Vladislava Stoyanova

Katedra ústavního práva zve na další seminář Prague Constitutional Seminar Series:

Na semináři vystoupí Vladislava Stoyanova (University of Lund), a to s vysoce aktuálním tématem pozitivních závazků státu: Positive Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights: Do Analytical Clarity and Predictability Matter? K uvedenému tématu publikovala mj. úspěšnou (open access) monografii v Oxford University Press.

K pravidelnému odběru e-mailů o seminární sérii se můžete přihlásit zde.

Seminář se uskuteční na fakultě ve středu dne 8. dubna od 16:00 (místnost č. 21).

Akce se uskuteční v anglickém jazyce. 

Všichni jsou vřele vítáni!

--

Bio

Vladislava Stoyanova is Associate Professor of Public International Law at the Faculty of Law, Lund University (Sweden). She is the holder of the Wallenberg Academy Fellowship (2021-2026) awarded by the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation and the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. She is the receiver of the 2023 Henrik Enderlein Prize for research excellence. Her key publications include Positive Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights: Within and Beyond Boundaries (Oxford University Press, 2023 open access), Human Trafficking and Slavery Reconsidered: Conceptual Limits and States’ Positive Obligations in European Law (Cambridge University Press, 2017), From Protection to Coercion: the Limits of Positive Obligations in Human Rights (Hart Publishing, 2026 open access) and The Role of the Causal Inquiry under the European Convention on Human Rights (Cambridge University Press, forthcoming).

Anotace

The development of positive obligations has been one of the hallmarks of the work of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or the Court) in interpreting the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Various issues from various spheres of life have been reviewed by the Court as involving possible breaches of positive obligations. Given the extensive regulatory functions of the State and the enormous breadth of state activities, any harm could potentially be a ground for making an argument that the State failed to fulfil its positive human rights obligations by failing to prevent or mitigate harm or risk. As a result, it is rather unclear under which conditions positive obligations may be triggered and how far-reaching they may be, given how difficult it is to draw the limits of state responsibility for omissions. The difficulties in determining and delimiting the role of the State in the contemporary society contribute to this uncertainty.

In this presentation, I will try to explain the analytical steps that the Court undertakes and the standards that it employs to determine that a positive obligation existed and that it was breached.