Cover not available
Part of
Handbook of Terminology: Volume 3. Legal Terminology
Edited by Łucja Biel and Hendrik J. Kockaert
[Handbook of Terminology 3] 2023
► pp. 327–350

From the domestic to the supranational

The terminology of “expulsion” as used at the European Court of Human Rights

| European Court of Human Rights
The European Court of Human Rights uses “supranational” terms to set out its general principles, while also dealing with (and translating) culture-bound terms of domestic law. This Chapter looks at its specific terminology in the field of “expulsion”, including the translation of domestic terms, either from a “third” language into an official language (English/French) or from one official language to the other. The polysemic nature of the relevant terms and overlapping concepts present difficulties for both drafters and translators. The term “expulsion” itself has been given an autonomous meaning by the Court. Imported terminology, whether from EU migration law (return) or international asylum law (refoulement), must also be used correctly. The author advocates accuracy and consistency in this field.
Keywords: supranational terminology, culture-bound terms, expulsion, autonomous concepts
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Overview of the use and translation of terminology at the ECtHR
  • 3.Relevance and issues of expulsion-related terminology
  • 4.Domestic-law terminology
  • 5.Autonomous concepts
  • 6.Other international-law terminology
  • 7.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives (CC BY-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 1 December 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hot.3.dom2
References (40)
References
Arlettaz, Fernando. 2018. “Expulsions collectives : définitions et portée de leur interdiction dans la jurisprudence de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme.” Canadian Yearbook of International Law 56:58–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauder, Harald. 2014. “Why We Should Use the Term ‘Illegalized’ Refugee or Immigrant: A Commentary.” International Journal of Refugee Law 26(3):327–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bissardon, Sébastien. 2013. Guide du langage juridique. 4th edn. Paris: Litec.Google Scholar
Brannan, James. 2013. “Coming to Terms with the Supranational: Translating for the European Court of Human Rights.” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 26(4):909–925. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. “Specificities of Translation at the European Court of Human Rights: Policy and Practice.” In Institutional Translation for International Governance, edited by Fernando Prieto Ramos, 170–180. Oxford: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Bridge, Frank. 1994. Council of Europe French-English Legal Dictionary. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Press.Google Scholar
Camus, Albert. 1944. “Sur une philosophie de l’expression.” Poésie 44.Google Scholar
Conseil d’État, ed. 2017. Guide de Légistique. 3rd edn. Paris: La documentation Française.Google Scholar
Crawford, James. 2014. Chance, Order, Change: The Course of International Law. General Course on Public International Law. Leiden: Pocket Books of the Hague Academy of International Law. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Farcy, Jean-Baptiste and Noémi Desguin. 2017. “‘Transmigrant’ : un vocable réducteur pour des réalités juridiques multiples.” Revue du droit des étrangers 196:685–699.Google Scholar
Fernández-Silva, Sabela and Koen Kerremans. 2011. “Terminological Variation in Source Texts and Translations: A Pilot Study.” Meta 56(2):318–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
FRA (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights) and Council of Europe, eds. 2020. Handbook on European law relating to asylum, borders and immigration. 3rd edn. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
Fripp, Eric, ed. 2015. The Law and Practice of Expulsion and Exclusion from the United Kingdom. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
GISTI, ed. 2019. Le guide de l’entrée et du séjour des étrangers en France. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
Giuffré, Mariagiulia. 2020. The Readmission of Asylum Seekers under International Law. Oxford: Hart. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grant, John and Craig Barker, eds. 2009. Parry and Grant, Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law. 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harvey, Malcolm. 2000. “A Beginner’s Course in Legal Translation: the Case of Culture-Bound Terms.” In La traduction juridique: Histoire, théorie(s) et pratique / Legal Translation: History, Theory/ies, Practice. (Proceedings, Geneva, 17–19 February 2000), 357–369. Bern/Geneva: ASTTI/ETI.Google Scholar
Jennings, Robert and Arthur Watts, eds. 1992. Oppenheim’s International Law. 9th edn. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Kälin, Walter. 2010. “Aliens, Expulsion and Deportation”. Oxford: Max Planck Encyclopedias of International Law [MPIL].Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Sarah. 2016. “Assessing the Existence of Criticism of the European Court of Human Rights.” In Criticism of the European Court of Human Rights, edited by Patricia Popelier, Sarah Lambrecht, Koen Lemmens, 505–553. Cambridge: Intersentia. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Law, Jonathan, ed. 2015. Oxford Dictionary of Law. 8th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Letsas, George. 2004. “The Truth in Autonomous Concepts: How to interpret the ECHR.” European Journal of International Law 15(2):279–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lutz, Fabian. 2010. The Negotiations on the Return Directive. Nijmegen: Wolf.Google Scholar
Malblanc, Matthias. 2019. La technique des notions autonomes en droit de la Convention européenne des droits de l’Homme. Doctoral dissertation, Lyon 2 University.
Merrills, John. 1993. The Development of International Law by the European Court of Human Rights. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Nicholson, Kate and Anna Stevenson. 2004. Harrap’s Law Dictionary / Dalloz Dictionnaire Juridique. Edinburgh: Harrap and Paris: Dalloz.Google Scholar
Peruzzo, Katia. 2012. “Secondary Term Formation within the EU: Term Transfer, Legal Transplant or Approximation of Member States’ Legal Systems?” The Journal of Specialised Translation 18:175–186.Google Scholar
. 2019. National law in supranational case-law: A linguistic analysis of European Court of Human Rights judgments in English. Trieste: Edizioni Università di Trieste.Google Scholar
Prieto Ramos, Fernando. 2014. “Parameters for Problem-Solving in Legal Translation: Implications for Legal Lexicography and Institutional Terminology Management.” In The Ashgate Handbook of Legal Translation, edited by Le Cheng, King Kui Sin & Anne Wagner, 121–134. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Rouquette, Rémi. 2002. Dictionnaire du droit administratif. Paris: Le Moniteur.Google Scholar
Salmon, Jean, ed. 2001. Dictionnaire de droit international public. Brussels: Bruylant.Google Scholar
Šarčević, Susan. 1997. New Approach to Legal Translation. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
. 2018. “Challenges to Legal Translators in Institutional Settings.” In Institutional Translation for International Governance, edited by Fernando Prieto Ramos, 9–24. Oxford: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Shelton, Dinah. 1997. “Reconcilable Differences? The Interpretation of Multilingual Treaties.” Hastings International and Comparative Law Review 20(3):611–638.Google Scholar
Shutter, Sue. 1992. Immigration and Nationality Law Handbook. London: Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants.Google Scholar
Sudre, Frédéric. 1998. “Le recours aux ‘notions autonomes’.” In L’interprétation de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme, edited by Frédéric Sudre, 93–131. Brussels: Bruylant.Google Scholar
. 2019. Droit européen et international des droits de l’homme. 14th edn. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Weis, Paul, ed. 1995. The Refugee Convention, 1951: The Travaux Préparatoires analysed with a commentary by the late Dr Paul Weis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Also available at [URL] (consulted 27/11/2022).
Weston, Martin. 1991. English Reader’s Guide to the French Legal System. New York: Berg.Google Scholar
. 2005. “Characteristics and constraints of producing bilingual judgments: the example of the European Court of Human Rights.” In Jurilinguistics: between Law and Language, edited by Jean-Claude Gémar and Nicholas Kasirer, 445–459. Brussels: Bruylant.Google Scholar