Suchergebnisse

Abstract
The European Convention of Human Rights system was originally created to sound the alarm if democracy was threatened in the member states. Yet, it eventually developed into a very different system with a focus on providing individual justice in an ever growing number of member states. This transformation has raised fundamental questions as to the level of difference and diversity allowed within the common European human rights space. Was the system to rest on minimum standards with room for domestic differences, or was it to create uniform standards? These questions have come up as increasingly contentious issues over the past years and have triggered a number of reforms seeking to introduce more subsidiarity in the system, striking a different balance between the European and national oversight of human rights. The article analyses this turn to subsidiarity by exploring whether the reform process has introduced new forms of difference and diversity within the common space of European human rights. Covering the period from 2000 to the end of 2019 and using a dataset of all judgments of the period, the article provides a structural analysis of developments in reference to the margin of appreciation which is the European Court of Human Rights' long-standing tool for balancing the common standards, yet leaving space for individual member states to find local solutions to implementing those standards. It concludes that recent developments have contributed to a more federal-style construction of European human rights with more space for differences within the common general standards.

Are international institutions more prone to face backlash politics than domestic ones? Are international institutions easy targets for satisfying domestic political interests? Using the case of the recent criticism of the European Court of Human Rights, the article explores whether international institutions are more susceptible to face backlash politics than domestic ones due to the dual nature of international politics. The empirical study, focusing on the reform of the European Court of Human Rights through the 2018 Copenhagen Declaration, suggests that pre-existing commitments to international institutions might be given up rapidly when significant domestic interests collide with international institutions and their practices. The analysis, however, also shows that backlash politics against international institutions is transformed when seeking institutional reform. Entering a collective bargaining process, backlash objectives are changed by the logic of diplomatic negotiation, academic scrutiny and the interests of the other member states and civil society. This suggests that the two-level logic of ordinary international politics has a mediating effect on domestically fuelled backlash campaigns.

Making human rights intelligible : an introduction to a sociology of human rights /Mikael Rask Madsen and Gert Verschraegen --State building, constitutional rights and the social construction of norms : outline for a sociology of constitutions /Chris Thornhill --Differentiation and inclusion : a neglected sociological approach to fundamental rights /Gert Verschraegen --Beyond prescription : toward a reflexive sociology of human rights /Mikael Rask Madsen --Human rights between brute fact and articulated aspiration /Paul Stenner --International human rights versus democracy promotion : on two different meanings of human rights in US foreign policy /Nicolas Guilhot --Towards a socio-legal analysis of the European Convention on Human Rights /Steven Greer --In defence of societies /Judith Blau and Alberto Moncada --From citizenship to human rights to human rights education /Francisco O. Ramirez and Rennie Moon --(Human) rights and solidarity : restructuring the national welfare space /Frederik Thuesen --Adapting locally to international health and human rights standards : an alternative theoretical framework for progressive realisation /Lesley A. Jacobs --"Legal form" and the purchase of human rights discourse in domestic policy-making : the achievement of same-sex marriage in Canada /Luke McNamara --Activating the law : exploring the legal responses of NGOs to gross rights violations /Loveday Hodson --The complexities of human rights implementation within the Costa Rican police system /Quirine Eijkman.

Leading scholars and practitioners cast new light on the substantial jurisprudence and ongoing political reform of the European Court of Human Rights. The analysis in this edited collection traces the development of the supranational European human rights system and provides original insights into the challenges facing the Court.

With globalization and Europeanization, profound changes have taken place in the composition and structure of elites. Once solidly tied to the nation state, elites have, following processes of differentiation and specialization, become more transnational than ever before. Their development has been conditioned by the evolving relationship between international, transnational, and national powers. In the European context, key institutional players today include the European Commission, the European Ombudsman and the European Court of Justice as aspiring representatives of the general European interest and the Council of Ministers and member states as representing national interests in the EU. Their relationship and changing interfaces are crucial when assessing the development of non-elected political elites as well as more generally the rise of an institutionalized and integrated Europe. ; peerReviewed

This article examines the political and legal processes through which human rights and migration law have become confounded – what we in this article more generally refer to as regime entanglement. Regime entanglement implies that different areas of law not only interact but are more fundamentally entwined and mutually impacted. Human rights and migration have historically had distinct trajectories in European law and politics, but the recent coupling of the two, we argue, have transformed both. Migration law has gained legal momentum and judicial empowerment from increasingly engaging human rights law and institutions; human rights law has gained legitimacy for its universalist aspirations by developing, albeit slowly, a jurisprudence on non-nationals' rights. Yet, the coupling has also been politically contentious – at times even explosive – which has in turn challenged both fields of law. Although this entanglement is a general European development, the article applies a more situated approach, using Denmark as a case for understanding how these two legal regimes have been implemented and interacted in national law and politics.