Thinking of the ECtHR case law on same-sex marriage from the perspective of modern natural law: An evaluation based on the right to marry under the ECHR

This thesis explores the applicability of modern natural law concepts to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judgements on same-sex marriage. Drawing on the theories of leading modern natural law scholars Lon Fuller and Ronald Dworkin, the study contrasts modern natural law philosophy against traditional natural law approaches, focusing on the individual-based perspectives that form the core of modern natural law. The research provides a comprehensive examination of two ECtHR judgements on same-sex marriage through the lens of Fuller's "Morality of Aspiration ", "Internal Morality of Law", and "Reciprocity", as well as Dworkin's "Right Answer Thesis" and "Law as Integrity". It critically assesses the ECtHR's heteronormative approach, the interpretation of equal marriage rights for same-sex couples, and the Court's use of the doctrines of "European consensus" and "margin of appreciation". Through the conceptual and doctrinal legal research methodology, the thesis reinterprets modern natural law theories to highlight the gaps in the ECtHR's decision making process regarding same-sex marriage. It seeks to identify innovative interpretation methods that may address these gaps, aiming to engender a paradigm shift in the legal discourse surrounding same-sex marriage under Article 12 of the ECHR. Ultimately, this study hopes to contribute to the evolution of ECtHR judgements in line with modern natural law philosophy. Key words: European Court of Human Rights, Modern Natural Law, Same-Sex Marriage, Morality of Aspiration, Internal Morality of Law, Reciprocity, Right Answer Thesis, Law as Integrity.