Abstract
The aim of the article is to propose and defend a distinctively political reading of the European Convention of Human Rights. Drawing on a range of different sources, my core claim is that realistically construed considerations of political legitimacy, stemming from the institutional context within which ECtHR judges operate, can explain and justify a morally non-ideal understanding of Convention rights on the part of the Court. I call the kind of non-ideal reading of the ECHR that I defend ‘political’ because it results from distinctive concerns regarding the Court’s legitimacy in a wider context marked by the circumstances of politics, broadly understood. These concerns depend on apprehending the ECHR as a distinctive institutional-cum-legal regime or system whose stability has political underpinnings. Tackling them requires resorting to some form of political judgment aimed at working out how various normative parameters, including legitimacy and stability, interact with a morally ideal (or ‘first-best’) understanding of any given ECHR right.
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Environmental Science
Reference57 articles.
1. Prisoners’ Voting Rights: Case Closed?https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2019/01/30/elizabeth-adams-prisoners-voting-rights-case-closed
2. Analysing the Prisoner Voting Saga and the British Challenge to Strasbourg
3. Political Constitutionalism: A Republican Defence of the Constitutionality of Democracy;Bellamy,2007
4. The Democratic Legitimacy of International Human Rights Conventions: Political Constitutionalism and the European Convention on Human Rights
5. Judges on Thin Ice: The European Court of Human Rights and the Treatment of Asylum Seekers;Bossuyt;Inter American and European Human Rights Journal,2010
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