Abstract
AbstractCourts are often criticised as undemocratic. The backlash against international courts in the last decade is also partly driven by this concern. Human rights courts’ legitimacy is particularly challenged because they aim to protect human rights against the very states that need to comply with and implement the courts’ judgements. Therefore, several international courts have developed mechanisms of deference to states. One especially interesting tool is the European Court of Human Rights’ margin of appreciation doctrine. This paper proposes that the margin of appreciation can ensure the conditions of personal autonomy by protecting human rights while respecting the democratic decisions of states. Yet, states’ decisions should only be respected insofar as they realise political autonomy. Understanding the margin in this way allows us to critically evaluate arguments made under this label. The paper reviews developments in the ECtHR practice with regard to (a) different cases that use the margin of appreciation doctrine, (b) appeals to a European consensus, and (c) the procedural turn in its review and assesses whether and how they can be justified in the light of considerations about personal and political autonomy.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference34 articles.
1. Alter KJ (2008) Agents or trustees? International courts in their political context. Eur J Int Rel 14(1):33–63
2. Bellamy R (2014) The democratic legitimacy of international human rights conventions: political constitutionalism and the Hirt case. In: Føllesdal A, Schaffer JK, Ulfstein G (eds) The Legitimacy of International Human Rights Regimes. Legal, Political and Philosophical Perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 243–271
3. Benvenisti E (1998) Margin of appreciation, consensus, and universal standards symposium issue: the proliferation of international tribunals: piecing together the puzzle. New York University J Int Law and Politics 31(4):843–854
4. Bork RH (2003) Coercing virtue: the worldwide rule of judges. AEI Press
5. Brems E (2017) The ‘logics’ of procedural-type review by the European court of human rights. In: Gerards J, Brems E (eds) Procedural Review in European Fundamental Rights Cases. Cambridge University Press, pp 17–39