International Child Abduction in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights: A Doctrinal and Empirical Analysis

The European Court of Human Rights (the Court) delivered its first judgment on international child abduction over two decades ago. For the first ten years, it seemed like the Court had seamlessly integrated the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (the 1980 Hague Convention) into its interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR). However, the first intervention of the Grand Chamber on this family law issue disrupted this apparent harmony. By blurring the distinction between custody and return proceedings, the Grand Chamber seemed to undermine the foundational principle of the 1980 Hague Convention. This judgment, and the ensuing controversy, served as a catalyst for a broader reflection on the Court’s reliance on external instruments of international law. Accordingly, this study aims to assess the Court’s approach to the challenges raised by its reception of the 1980 Hague Convention. The premise of this research is that this family law treaty is uniquely embedded in the international legal order, which increases the risk of disrupting the synergy existing between the actors who use this instrument to fulfil their mandates. The choice was made to employ both doctrinal and empirical research to provide a comprehensive understanding of the Court’s rulings and practices in this type of cases. The controversy evoked above emerged at a time when the Court was rethinking its approach to the balancing exercise inherent in the qualified rights of Articles 8-11 ECHR. Building on the insights of human rights scholars who have closely examined this recent development, this study offers a novel perspective on the scope and limitations of the Court’s supervision in the area of international child abduction.