Search results

This article offers an empirically grounded interpretivist analysis of the social legitimacy of the European Court of Human Rights based on domestic judicial and political elite accounts of the legitimacy of the Court in Turkey, Bulgaria, United Kingdom, Ireland, and Germany. The central argument of the article is that the social legitimacy of the European Court of Human Rights is based on a constant comparison between the values and goals of domestic institutions and the values and goals of the European Court of Human Rights. More specifically, the social legitimacy of the European Court of Human Rights is grounded in the logic of a fair compromise: What actors think they lose by according legitimacy to the European Court of Human Rights must be balanced by what they perceive to gain in return. Three factors organize how actors in different domestic settings strike a fair compromise in their domestic contexts: a) perception of domestic human rights conditions, b) commitment to cosmopolitan ideals of human rights and international law, and c) commitment to domestic institutions.

For some time now, the European Court of Human Rights is under substantial pressure. From a case overload crisis it stumbled into a legitimacy crisis with regard to certain countries. This should be taken seriously, since scholars warn that institutions with eroding legitimacy risk demise or reform. The goal of this volume is to explore how widespread this critical attitude of the European Court of Human Rights really is. It also assesses to what extent such criticism is being translated in strategies at the political level or at the judicial level and brings about concrete changes in the dynamics between national and European fundamental rights protection. The book is topical and innovative, as these questions have so far remained largely unexplored, especially cross-nationally.Far from focusing exclusively on those voices that are currently raised so loud, conclusions are based on comparative in-depth reports, covering fifteen Contracting Parties and the EU.With contributions of Olgun Akbulut, Tilmann Altwicker, Katarzyna Blay-Grabarczyk, Anna Gamper, Janneke Gerards, Krystyna Kowalik-Banczyk, Sarah Lambrecht, Koen Lemmens, Lubomir Majercík, Giuseppe Martinico, Roger Masterman, Aaron Matta, Christophe Maubernard, Armen Mazmanyan, Katharina Pabel, Eszter Polgári, Patricia Popelier, Clara Rauchegger, Michael Reiertsen and Henrik Wenander

Intro -- Contents -- Foreword -- Part I Preliminary study on counter-terrorismand human rights in the case lawof the European Court of Human Rights -- Part II A selection of terrorism-related cases heardby the European Court of Human Rights -- Selected cases -- A. v. The Netherlands (Application No. 4900/06), 20 July 2010 -- A. and Others v. The United Kingdom (Application No. 3455/05), 19 February 2009 -- Abdullah Aydin v. Turkey (No. 2) (Application No. 63739/00), 10 November 2005 -- Acar and Others v. Turkey (Applications Nos. 36088/97 and 38417/97), 24 May 2005 -- Akkoç v. Turkey (Applications Nos. 22947/93 and 22948/93), 10 October 2000 -- Aksoy v. Turkey (Application No. 100/1995/606/694), 26 November 1996 -- Aktas v. Turkey (Application No. 24351/94), 24 April 2003 -- Alinak v. Turkey (Application No. 40287/98), 29 March 2005 -- Arslan v. Turkey (Application No. 23462/94), 8 July 1999 -- Association Ekin v. France (Application No. 39288/98), 17 July 2001 -- Başkaya and Okçuoğlu v. Turkey (Applications Nos. 23536/94 and 24408/94), 8 July 1999 -- Batı and Others v. Turkey (Applications Nos. 33097/96 and 57834/00), 3 June 2004 -- Brannigan and McBride v. The United Kingdom (Applications Nos. 14553/89 and 14554/89), 25 May 1993 -- Brogan and Others v. The United Kingdom (Applications Nos. 11209/84, 11234/84, 11266/84 and 11386/85), 29 November 1988 -- Castells v. Spain (Application No. 11798/85), 23 April 1992 -- Ceylan v. Turkey (Application No. 23556/94), 8 July 1999 -- Chahal v. The United Kingdom (Application No. 70/1995/576/662), 15 November 1996 -- Dağtekin and Others v. Turkey (Application No. 70516/01), 13 December 2008 -- Demir and Others v. Turkey (Applications Nos. 71/1997/855/1062-1064), 23 September 1998 -- Dicle v. Turkey (Application No. 34685/97), 10 November 2004 -- Dikme v. Turkey (Application No. 20869/92), 11 July 2000.