نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
پژوهشگر واحد آموزش و پژوهش دادگستری کل استان تهران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
Legal language is a vital tool for judicial systems to ensure justice and interpret complex human rights concepts. However, its interpretation often encounters semantic and interpretative challenges. A key challenge is meaning instability, stemming from diverse judicial interpretations. Legal language in case law is not fixed but constantly changes, shaped by each society's social, political, and cultural contexts. Concepts like justice, liberty, and human dignity face semantic instability and internal contradictions due to linguistic and interpretative complexities. These instabilities may result in conflicts and contradictions in court rulings. The European Court of Human Rights, as a leading international judicial body, plays a pivotal role in human rights interpretation and application. This article adopts an analytical and critical approach, employing Jacques Derrida’s philosophy of deconstruction to explore semantic instabilities and contradictions in the Court’s case law. Deconstruction uncovers hidden contradictions in legal language, showing how meaning becomes variable and unstable during interpretation and how courts may inadvertently fall into semantic traps. The article proposes three practical solutions to reduce semantic instability: (1) drafting clear interpretative principles to guide rulings, (2) establishing mechanisms to monitor coherence and consistency in judgments, and (3) considering socio-cultural contexts when interpreting human rights concepts. These strategies aim to address semantic challenges, ensuring more consistent and context-sensitive interpretations in human rights jurisprudence. Through this framework, the article offers insights into mitigating the complexities of legal language, contributing to the broader discourse on judicial interpretation and its role in promoting justice.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)