Times letters: Diktats from European human rights judges

Sir, Your leading article “Mission Creep” (Apr 12) urges the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) to “get back to basics” in its interpretation of the convention. I shall leave to those better qualified to criticise the ECHR’s ruling against the Swiss government on its obligation to reduce climate emissions, but it is wrong to confine the purposes of the treaty to preventing the resurgence of the tyranny perpetrated by the Nazis, and to Churchill’s 1948 “message to Europeans”. We must recall the oft-repeated interpretative principle that the convention should be a living, breathing instrument capable of responding to circumstances. That is one of its greatest strengths, and in this way the court can maintain its relevance. It is at least arguable that nothing