Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:22:14.457Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The European Court of Human Rights between Law and Politics, edited by Jonas Christoffersen and Mikael Rask Madsen. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011, xvii + 229 + (index) 6pp (£60 hardback). ISBN 978-0-19-969449-5.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Rachel Clare Herron
Rachel Clare Herron*
Affiliation:
Durham Law School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Information
Legal Studies , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , June 2012 , pp. 325 - 331
Copyright
Copyright © Society of Legal Scholars 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. On reform of the ECtHR generally, see, eg, Caflisch, L ‘the reform of the European Court of Human Rights: Protocol No. 14 and beyond’ (2006) 6 Hum Rts L Rev 403 Google Scholar at 403–415; Mowbray, A ‘Faltering steps on the path to reform of the Strasbourg Enforcement System’ (2007) 7 HRLR 609 Google Scholar ; A Mowbray ‘Crisis measures of institutional reform for the European Court of Human Rights’ (2009) HRLR 647; Paraskeva, C ‘Reforming the European Court of Human Rights: an ongoing challenge’ (2007) 76 Nordic J Int'l L 185 CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Greer, S The European Convention on Human Rights: Achievements, Problems and Prospects (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006) pp 136–165 CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

2. United Kingdom Chairmanship of the Council of Europe: Priorities and Objectives, pp 1–2, http://www.coe.int/lportal/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=46e525f1-23ca-4cff-ab23-e8eb9b183ed2&groupId=10227

3. See High Level Conference on the Future of the European Court of Human Rights, Interlaken Declaration (Interlaken, Switzerland, 18–19 February 2010); and High Level Conference on the Future of the European Court of Human Rights, Final Declaration (Izmir, Turkey, 26–27 April 2010).

4. Such as regarding prisoner voting rights, in Hirst v United Kingdom (74025/01) (2006) EHRR 41 (ECHR (Grand Chamber)). For an analysis of this decision, see Foster, S ‘the long and winding road: the battle for prisoners’ right to vote' (2011) 16(1) Cov LJ 19 Google Scholar .

5. E Bates ‘The birth of the European Convention on Human Rights – and the European Court of Human Rights’ in Law and Politics, pp 17-42. A more in-depth analysis by Bates can be found in ` Bates, E The Evolution of the European Convention on Human Rights: From its Inception to the Creation of a Permanent Court of Human Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

6. MR Madsen ‘The protracted institutionalization of the Strasbourg Court: from legal diplomacy to integrationist jurisprudence’ in Law and Politics, pp 43–60.

7. Ibid, pp 55–59.

8. E Voeten ‘Politics, judicial behaviour and institutional design’ in Law and Politics, pp 61–76.

9. See also Voeten, E ‘the impartiality of international judges: evidence from the European Court of Human Rights’ (2008) 102 American Political Science Review 417 CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

10. Law and Politics, pp 70–74.

11. Ibid, p 73.

12. RA Cichowski ‘Civil society and the European Court of Human Rights’ in Law and Politics, pp 77–97.

13. Ibid, pp 95–96.

14. See also Hodson, L NGOs and the Struggle for Rights in Europe (Oxford: Hart, 2011)Google Scholar .

15. A Lester ‘The European Court of Human Rights after 50 years’ in Law and Politics, pp 98–115.

16. See A Lester ‘The European Court of Human Rights after 50 years’ (2009) EHRLR 461.

17. Lester, above n 15, p 114.

18. This effect was predicted – see Mahoney, P ‘Speculating on the future of the reformed European Court of Human Rights’ (1999) 20 HRLJ (1999) 1 Google Scholar at 4.

19. Lester, above n 15, p 115.

20. R Harmsen ‘The reform of the convention system: institutional restructuring and the (geo-)politics of human rights’ in Law and Politics, pp 119–143.

21. Ibid, pp 121–131.

22. S Hennette-Vauchez ‘Constitutional v international? When unified reformatory rationales mismatch the plural paths of legitimacy of ECHR law’ in Law and Politics, pp 144–163; J Christoffersen ‘Individual and constitutional justice: can the power balance of adjudication be reversed?’ in Law and Politics, pp 181–203.

23. See, eg, Leach, P ‘Access to the European Court of Human Rights: from a legal entitlement to a lottery?’ (2006) 27 HRLJ 11 Google Scholar ; M-B Dembour ‘“Finishing off” cases: the radical solution to the problem of the expanding ECtHR caseload’[2002] EHRLR 604 at 621.

24. See, eg, Wildhaber, L ‘a constitutional future for the European Court of Human Rights’ (2002) 23 HRLJ 161 Google Scholar at 162–163; Mahoney, P ‘New challenges for the European Court of Human Rights resulting from the expanding caseload and membership’ (2002) 21 Pennsylvania State Intl L Rev 101 Google Scholar at 105.

25. Law and Politics, pp 190–202. See also ` Blackburn, R and Polakiewicz, J Fundamental Rights in Europe: The European Convention on Human Rights and its Member States, 1950–2000 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001)Google Scholar .

26. Law and Politics, p 203.

27. See Helfer, LR ‘Redesigning the European Court of Human Rights: embeddedness as a deep structural principles of the European human rights regime’ (2008) 19 EJIL 125 CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 158. See also Keller, H , A Fischer and D Kuhne ‘Debating the future of the European Court of Human Rights after the Interlaken Conference: two innovative proposals’ (2010) 21(4) Eur J of Int Law 1025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

28. L Scheeck ‘Diplomatic intrusions, dialogues and fragile equilibria: the European Court as a constitutional actor of the European Union’ in Law and Politics, pp 164–180.

29. Ibid, pp 168–171.

30. Ibid, pp 175–179.

31. L Wildhaber, ‘Rethinking the European Court of Human Rights’ in Law and Politics, pp 204–229.

32. Ibid, pp 209, 210, 223, 225.

33. Ibid, pp 224–226.

34. See also ECtHR Annual Report 2010 (Strasbourg: Registry of the European Court of Rights, 2011) p 6 Google ScholarPubMed .

35. See also Final Report of the Group of Wise Persons to the Committee of Ministers, Council of Europe (November 2006); Council of Europe, Opinion of the Court on the Report of the Group of Wise Persons (adopted by the Plenary Court on 2 April 2007).

36. See, eg, Wildhaber, L The European Court of Human Rights 1998–2006: History, Achievements, Reforms (Kehl-Strasbourg-Arlington: NP Engel, 2006)Google Scholar ; Wildhaber, above n 26; Bates, above n 5 (The Evolution of the European Convention on Human Rights); Voeten, above n 10; Lester, above n 17; R Harmsen ‘The European Court of Human Rights as a “constitutional court”: definitional debates and the dynamics of reform’ in ` Morison, J, McEvoy, K and Anthony, G (eds) Judges, Transition and Human Rights Cultures (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007) pp 33–53 CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

37. See, eg, Douzinas, C The End of Human Rights: Critical Legal Thought at the Turn of the Century (Oxford: Hart, 2000)Google Scholar .

38. Law and Politics, p 2.

39. Ibid, p 11.

40. See, eg, speech by Luzius Wildhaber, President of the European Court of Human Rights, on the occasion of the opening of the judicial year, 21 January 2005 in ECtHR, Annual Report 2004 (2005) p 6; S Greer ‘Protocol No. 14 and the future of the European Court of Human Rights’[2005] PL 83 at 104.