Chapter XII Final clauses | Article 81 Notification | Riga Revision 1.0

🚧 RIGA REVISION 1.0 [FIRST DRAFT]
Complete analysis using 8-Point Evaluation Framework with systematic gender asymmetry review.
📌 Navigation:
← Article 80 | All Articles

ORIGINAL TEXT (Istanbul Convention, adopted May 11, 2011)

Article 81 – Notification

75 and 76;

d any amendment adopted in accordance with Article

72 and the date on which such an amendment enters into force;

e any reservation and withdrawal of reservation made in pursuance of Article 78;

f any denunciation made in pursuance of the provisions of Article 80;

g any other act, notification or communication relating to this Convention.
In witness whereof the undersigned, being duly authorised thereto, have signed this Convention.
Done at Istanbul, this 11th day of May 2011, in English and in French, both texts being equally authentic, in

a single copy which shall be deposited in the archives of the Council of Europe. The Secretary General of the Council of Europe shall transmit certified copies to each member State of the Council of Europe, to the non-member States which have participated in the elaboration of this Convention, to the European Union and to any State invited to accede to this Convention.
[Source: CETS No. 210, Article 81]

8-POINT EVALUATION FRAMEWORK

Evaluation Criteria: This article is assessed using the following 8 criteria with proper citation of sources:

1. Definitions: Are terms clearly defined? Is a sound logical framework present? Which logical fallacies appear? Citations required.
2. Legal Clarity: Is the convention legally clear and understandable for enforcement? Can it be implemented consistently? Legal precedents cited.
3. Sovereignty Impact: Does this respect diverse legal systems and state sovereignty? International law sources cited.
4. Victim Protection: Does this genuinely enhance safety and protection for victims? Research evidence cited.
5. Bad Actor Exploitability: Can this be weaponized for repression, manipulation, or false accusations? Case studies cited.
6. Practical Feasibility: Can states actually implement this with realistic resources? Implementation data cited.
7. Unintended Consequences: What negative externalities might emerge? Policy analysis cited.
8. Cultural Sensitivity: Does this allow for legitimate cultural variation while maintaining core protections? Comparative studies cited.
🎓 CITATION REQUIREMENTS:
All analyses must include:

  • Academic sources (peer-reviewed journals, legal scholarship)
  • Primary sources (legal documents, official reports, case law)
  • Diverse perspectives (multiple ideological and cultural frameworks)
  • Implementation data from multiple jurisdictions
  • Expert opinions from various stakeholder groups

ISSUE IDENTIFICATION

Score: 0 (Negative-only scoring: each issue = -1 point)

v1.05 includes systematic gender asymmetry review

Issues Identified:

No significant textual issues identified in initial review.

PROPOSED REVISIONS

Revision principles: Clarity, consistency, cultural sensitivity, sovereignty respect, victim protection, exploitability reduction

Option A: [Gender-symmetric revision with rationale and sources]

Option B: [Alternative approach with rationale and sources]

Option C: [Minimalist revision with rationale and sources]

Each option includes: Legal precedents, implementation feasibility, cultural impact assessment, stakeholder perspectives

💭 STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES:
Consider views from: Victim advocacy groups, legal scholars, cultural/religious communities, implementation practitioners, state sovereignty advocates, human rights organizations, gender equality advocates, and others affected by this article.
📌 Navigation:
← Article 80 | All Articles

About Riga Revision 1.0: Comprehensive article-by-article critique using the 8-Point Evaluation Framework, rigorous technical documentation standards, and multi-stakeholder perspectives. This is a FIRST DRAFT prepared with AI assistance. Version 2.0 and beyond will be prepared by human experts.

Resources: Evaluation Framework | 8 C’s of Technical Writing | All Articles

Disclaimer: This analysis represents critical examination from multiple perspectives and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are encouraged to consult primary sources and qualified legal professionals.

Related Articles

Article 75 – Signature and entry into force

Article 75 – Signature and entry into force This Convention shall be open for signature by the member States of the Council of Europe, the non-member States which have participated in its elaboration and the European Union. This Convention is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited…

Article 77 – Territorial application

Article 77 – Territorial application Any State or the European Union may, at the time of signature or when depositing its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, specify the territory or territories to which this Convention shall apply. Any Party may, at any later date, by a declaration addressed to the Secretary General of…

Piscine Day 01

Pre-uptake experience More mysterious than clear, more rash than kind. First day After being accepted, there was a date, where I needed to “log in,” and do something. But I needed to schedule my stay and provide for my daughter during my month in Germany. It was not clear whether I was really accepted, or…

Responses

dainis w michel