Revisiting the debate about ‘constitutionalizing’ the European Court of Human Rights

Steven C Greer, Luzius Wildhaber

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

52 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In spite of the implementation of Protocol No 14 to the European
Convention on Human Rights on 1 June 2010, the European Court of
Human Rights continues to face a case overload crisis with no definitive
solution in sight. In this article we reconsider the role ‘constitutionalisation’might
play in providing a more secure future. Having distinguished
the three dominant analytical frameworksç‘individual justice’, ‘constitutional
justice’ and ‘pluralism’çin the ‘official’ and ‘academic/judicial’
streams of the debate, we conclude that a fourth, ‘constitutional pluralism’,
now offers a particularly attractive alternative.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)655-687
Number of pages34
JournalHuman Rights Law Review
Volume12
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2012

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Revisiting the debate about ‘constitutionalizing’ the European Court of Human Rights'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this