A different approach to the interpretation of the treaties: The ECHR's dynamic interpretation and the margin of appreciation doctrine

The rules for the interpretation of international treaties are determined by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969). These rules, which are determined according to the classical treaty regime, are interpreted and applied differently by the judicial bodies overseeing the implementation of human rights treaties. The supervisory bodies of human rights treaties, which prioritize the purpose of the treaty, put the reciprocity and consent element of the classical treaty regime into the background. The European Court of Human Rights also applies the dynamic interpretation method in which the purpose of the treaty is centered. The dynamic interpretation method plays a role in expanding the scope of substantive rights. This effect of the method leads to criticism that the States party to the European Convention on Human Rights are faced with new obligations that they initially did not accept. The European Court of Human Rights has developed the doctrine of margin of appreciation through case-law in order to alleviate the criticisms. This doctrine, which gives a certain range of action to the States Parties in the implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights, is far from giving the desired result and its borders become unclear due to the effect of the dynamic interpretation method expanding the scope of rights. The Court's different decisions in similar cases reduce legal certainty and even lead to the Court being accused of applying double standards. In this thesis, it has been tried to explain how the dynamic interpretation method and the doctrine of margin of appreciation work in theory and in practice, and the relationship between the two is analyzed.