Standards of review in international courts

Shai Dothan

Chapter 20 in Research Handbook on Accountability for Human Rights Violations, 2025, pp 352-364 from Edward Elgar Publishing

Abstract: International human rights courts review applications brought before them by victims, and these courts need to determine whether the facts described constitute violations of human rights norms. They fulfill this task in a world of scarce resources, under the potential threat of backlash, and without being immune from error. The decision processes of human rights courts like the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) take these conditions into account. Not all cases are treated the same way. The margin of appreciation doctrine allows the ECHR to defer to some state actions, and this margin can be narrowed or widened by the court. This is a doctrine of subsidiarity: it allows the ECHR to defer in some cases and intervene in others. Similar doctrines are available for other international courts. For example, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) adopted a similar doctrine of deference. There are also cases in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) and the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACtHPR) that follow the ‘margin of appreciation logic’. Even the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UN HRC), which officially rejected the margin of appreciation doctrine, has ended up using similar legal techniques. The literature has investigated different ways to adjust the margin of appreciation to the standards of review that are proper in particular circumstances. Among the techniques investigated in this chapter are widening the margin of appreciation when the procedures of adjudication and legislation in the state have been adequately conducted, and narrowing the margin in cases that involve a potential democratic failure − situations in which social groups are expected not to have sufficient power in representative bodies. The chapter will discuss the normative desirability as well as the political feasibility of different techniques and some criticism of the ways in which courts have applied these techniques in the past.

Keywords: International courts; Judicial review; Margin of appreciation; European Court of Human Rights; Democratic failures; Deference (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
ISBN: 9781035306923
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.elgaronline.com/doi/10.4337/9781035306930.00031 (application/pdf)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 403 Forbidden

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:elg:eechap:22074_20

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.e-elgar.com

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Chapters from Edward Elgar Publishing
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Jack Sweeney ().