Subsidiarity post-Brighton

Ondertitel:procedural rationality as answer?

During the Interlaeken and Brighton conferences in 2010 and 2012 on the reform of the European Court of Human Rights the High Contracting Parties demanded an increased focus of the Court on subsidiarity when considering cases. The Court had been criticized by several states, in particular the United Kingdom, for second-guessing domestic decisions of the democratically elected legislator. A procedural rationality approach could answer this critique. This approach implies that the Court takes the quality of the decision-making procedure as a decisive factor for its assessment of the proportionality of a domestic measure. In several recent high-profile cases the Court has adopted such approach providing the defending state with a wide margin of appreciation due to the high quality of the decision-making procedure. This contribution discusses to what extent the Court has applied this approach pre and post-Brighton and the potential pitfalls. The contribution concludes that this approach could provide a vital leeway between the courts supervisory and subsidiary role in the protection of human rights if applied coherently and consistently. However, it is no magic solution to silence the criticism against the court as the opponents of the court do not just reject the courts approach to proportionality review, but judicial review of legislative decisions altogether.

Jaar van publicatie:2017