European Consensus between Strategy and Principle
The Uses of Vertically Comparative Legal Reasoning in Regional Human Rights Adjudication
Nomos, 1. Edition 2021, 497 Pages
The product is part of the series
Beiträge zum ausländischen öffentlichen Recht und Völkerrecht
Description
This study offers a critical account of the reasoning employed by the European Court of Human Rights, particularly its references to European consensus. Based on an in-depth analysis of the Court’s case-law against the backdrop of human rights theory, it will be of interest to both practitioners and theorists.
While European consensus is often understood as providing an objective benchmark within the Court’s reasoning, this study argues to the contrary that it forms part of the very structures of argument that render human rights law indeterminate. It suggests that foregrounding consensus and the Court’s legitimacy serves to entrench the status quo and puts forward novel ways of approaching human rights to enable social transformation.
The work was awarded the Hermann Mosler Prize of the German Society for International Law.
While European consensus is often understood as providing an objective benchmark within the Court’s reasoning, this study argues to the contrary that it forms part of the very structures of argument that render human rights law indeterminate. It suggests that foregrounding consensus and the Court’s legitimacy serves to entrench the status quo and puts forward novel ways of approaching human rights to enable social transformation.
The work was awarded the Hermann Mosler Prize of the German Society for International Law.
Bibliographical data
| Edition | 1 |
|---|---|
| ISBN | 978-3-8487-8091-4 |
| Subtitle | The Uses of Vertically Comparative Legal Reasoning in Regional Human Rights Adjudication |
| Publication Date | Apr 27, 2021 |
| Year of Publication | 2021 |
| Publisher | Nomos |
| Format | Hardcover |
| Language | englisch |
| Pages | 497 |
| Medium | Book |
| Product Type | Scientific literature |
Reviews
»Many insights which stand on their own feet, and one can read this normative position as a sign of intellectual (and political) honesty of the author who is simply open about their internal motivations and views. In that sense, there is no stone that remains to be turned, including the author’s position, which will – one can expect with excitement – be further developed and defended in future work.«
Bosko Tripkovic, CML Rev. 2023, 1189
Bosko Tripkovic, CML Rev. 2023, 1189
Additional material
Product safety information
Manufacturer of products offered under GPSR
Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG
Waldseestraße 3 - 5
76530 Baden-Baden, Germany
service@nomos.de
www.nomos.de