The Battle for the Essence of Article 9: A Study of Third-Party Interventions in Selected Cases

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract (may include machine translation)

Vast body of literature on the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and its transformations focuses on the role of member-states and the Court itself. This paper will contribute to a less explored area focusing on the role of third-party interventions in Article 9 cases within a narrow scope of judgments in Key Cases and in front of the Grand Chamber. I argue that third parties communicating their interest through third party interventions shape the reasoning of the Court and influence the outcome of its decisions. However, like other recent authors in this paper, I challenge the assumption that third-party participation leads to the Court finding a violation. The paper will more specifically analyze: 1) the actors (who intervenes); 2) their arguments (towards what); and 3) what arguments the Court take seriously (what works). The analysis will not be conducted in isolation rather than through the prism of the specificities of the Courts' Article 9 jurisprudence; especially the use of the substantive margin of appreciation and the principle of subsidiarity, leading to the preliminary assumption that the Court has a more difficult task finding a violation due to self-imposed restraints. Consequently, an additional emphasis will be placed on locating the inter-play between the Courts' own principles and doctrines and the operationalization of third-party arguments towards the outcome of the judgments.
Original languageAmerican English
Pages (from-to)1-14
Journal Iustinianus Primus Law Review
Volume11
StatePublished - 2020

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The Battle for the Essence of Article 9: A Study of Third-Party Interventions in Selected Cases'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this