Abstract
AbstractStudies on international legal mobilization often analyze the mobilization efforts of activists at a single international court. Yet we know little about how activists choose among multiple international institutions to advance social justice claims. Drawing on comparative case studies of Turkish and British trade union activists' legal mobilization efforts and case law analysis, I show that activists, guided by their lawyers, probe multiple avenues to identify the legal institution with the highest judicial authority and is most responsive to activists' claims. Once they identify their target institution, the iterative process between a responsive court and activists' strategic litigation can build a court's jurisprudence in a new issue area, even if the court provides limited de jure rights protections. Activists primarily use international litigation strategy to leverage structural reforms at the domestic level and to set new international norms through precedents.
Funder
National Science Foundation
University of Washington
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Law,Sociology and Political Science
Reference83 articles.
1. International Courts as Agents of Legal Change: Evidence from LGBT Rights in Europe
2. Decision on admissibility and the merits Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO) and Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees (TCO) v. Sweden, Complaint No. 85/2012, ECSR, 2012.
3. Partial Compliance: A Comparison of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights;Hawkins;Journal of International Law and International Relations,2010
4. Making Rights a Reality?
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献