JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF LIMITATION CLAUSES AT THE INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS SYSTEMS: LESSONS FOR DOMESTIC COURTS

Abstract

Most human rights have no absolute character. In this sense, it ispermitted to restrict them by balancing their enjoyment againstother legitimate reasons or interests. For instance, the right tofreedom of expressions, freedom of assembly, freedom ofassociation ad freedom of movement can be limited on groundsof national security or public order. The main challenge in manyjurisdictions is how a balance is struck between the enjoymentsof human rights on the one hand and the use of legitimategrounds to limit the said rights on the other. The aim of thisarticle is to present international and regional jurisprudence toillustrate how human rights tribunals have attempted to grapplewith the problematic aspect of balancing between rights and legitimate interests. This discussion is crucial in a bid to providelessons to local courts in various jurisdictions, Tanzaniainclusive, when interpreting limitation clauses in their constitutions.  Key words: Limitation clauses, legitimate interests, the principle ofproportionality, margin of appreciation.