Judgement without justice: on the efficacy of the European human rights regime

Petra Guasti, David Siroky, Daniel Stockemer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is widely regarded as the most important human rights court worldwide. This article investigates the extent to which the court addresses cases from countries with the worst human rights performance. Using a new data set on all ECtHR judgments from 1995–2012, the analysis suggests that the ECtHR does not deliver its judgments against members of the Council of Europe with the worst human rights records, but instead against more democratic and affluent states. The reason is that litigating in front of a supranational court requires capacities that vulnerable people are unlikely to possess, except when aided by transnational advocacy groups. However, more judgements are issued against countries that lack independent judiciaries, where cases are less likely to be resolved at the domestic level. While the ECtHR might not address the worst human rights crimes, it plays a subsidiary role in the European human rights protection system by compensating for weak domestic judiciaries. However, the court's inability to independently pursue litigation, together with the lack of capacity in some countries to bring cases forward, have hampered more effective protection of human rights for the most vulnerable in Europe.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-21
Number of pages21
JournalDemocratization
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Mar 10 2016

Fingerprint

human rights
justice
Council of Europe
court
advocacy
lack
crime
offense

Keywords

  • compliance
  • efficacy
  • European Court of Human Rights
  • human rights
  • judgments
  • judicial independence
  • transnational advocacy groups
  • transnational courts

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Political Science and International Relations

Cite this

Judgement without justice : on the efficacy of the European human rights regime. / Guasti, Petra; Siroky, David; Stockemer, Daniel.

In: Democratization, 10.03.2016, p. 1-21.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f67876b0d329411586342dcac14a9951,
title = "Judgement without justice: on the efficacy of the European human rights regime",
abstract = "The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is widely regarded as the most important human rights court worldwide. This article investigates the extent to which the court addresses cases from countries with the worst human rights performance. Using a new data set on all ECtHR judgments from 1995–2012, the analysis suggests that the ECtHR does not deliver its judgments against members of the Council of Europe with the worst human rights records, but instead against more democratic and affluent states. The reason is that litigating in front of a supranational court requires capacities that vulnerable people are unlikely to possess, except when aided by transnational advocacy groups. However, more judgements are issued against countries that lack independent judiciaries, where cases are less likely to be resolved at the domestic level. While the ECtHR might not address the worst human rights crimes, it plays a subsidiary role in the European human rights protection system by compensating for weak domestic judiciaries. However, the court's inability to independently pursue litigation, together with the lack of capacity in some countries to bring cases forward, have hampered more effective protection of human rights for the most vulnerable in Europe.",
keywords = "compliance, efficacy, European Court of Human Rights, human rights, judgments, judicial independence, transnational advocacy groups, transnational courts",
author = "Petra Guasti and David Siroky and Daniel Stockemer",
year = "2016",
month = "3",
day = "10",
doi = "10.1080/13510347.2016.1154841",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--21",
journal = "Democratization",
issn = "1351-0347",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Judgement without justice

T2 - on the efficacy of the European human rights regime

AU - Guasti, Petra

AU - Siroky, David

AU - Stockemer, Daniel

PY - 2016/3/10

Y1 - 2016/3/10

N2 - The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is widely regarded as the most important human rights court worldwide. This article investigates the extent to which the court addresses cases from countries with the worst human rights performance. Using a new data set on all ECtHR judgments from 1995–2012, the analysis suggests that the ECtHR does not deliver its judgments against members of the Council of Europe with the worst human rights records, but instead against more democratic and affluent states. The reason is that litigating in front of a supranational court requires capacities that vulnerable people are unlikely to possess, except when aided by transnational advocacy groups. However, more judgements are issued against countries that lack independent judiciaries, where cases are less likely to be resolved at the domestic level. While the ECtHR might not address the worst human rights crimes, it plays a subsidiary role in the European human rights protection system by compensating for weak domestic judiciaries. However, the court's inability to independently pursue litigation, together with the lack of capacity in some countries to bring cases forward, have hampered more effective protection of human rights for the most vulnerable in Europe.

AB - The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is widely regarded as the most important human rights court worldwide. This article investigates the extent to which the court addresses cases from countries with the worst human rights performance. Using a new data set on all ECtHR judgments from 1995–2012, the analysis suggests that the ECtHR does not deliver its judgments against members of the Council of Europe with the worst human rights records, but instead against more democratic and affluent states. The reason is that litigating in front of a supranational court requires capacities that vulnerable people are unlikely to possess, except when aided by transnational advocacy groups. However, more judgements are issued against countries that lack independent judiciaries, where cases are less likely to be resolved at the domestic level. While the ECtHR might not address the worst human rights crimes, it plays a subsidiary role in the European human rights protection system by compensating for weak domestic judiciaries. However, the court's inability to independently pursue litigation, together with the lack of capacity in some countries to bring cases forward, have hampered more effective protection of human rights for the most vulnerable in Europe.

KW - compliance

KW - efficacy

KW - European Court of Human Rights

KW - human rights

KW - judgments

KW - judicial independence

KW - transnational advocacy groups

KW - transnational courts

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84961390688&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84961390688&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/13510347.2016.1154841

DO - 10.1080/13510347.2016.1154841

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84961390688

SP - 1

EP - 21

JO - Democratization

JF - Democratization

SN - 1351-0347

ER -