平衡能力与升值余地:构建欧洲人权法院的尊重

C. A. Chagas
{"title":"平衡能力与升值余地:构建欧洲人权法院的尊重","authors":"C. A. Chagas","doi":"10.1515/icl-2021-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The margin of appreciation is an important argumentative framework employed by the ECtHR. Through its application, the Court may establish a balanced relationship with the member states. This is why the margin is one of the main sources for the ECtHR’s exercise of deference. Deference happens when low intensity of review is applied – or a wide margin. Therefore, to properly know when to act deferentially demands a clear procedure to determine the intensity of review. However, the application of the margin still presents some weak points and lacks consistency. In this paper, I defend the possibility of applying formal balancing to provide a clearer structure for the exercise of the margin of appreciation and, thus, a way to improve deferential practices by the ECtHR. With the clear structure of balancing, factors are employed in a more organized manner and the relationships behind the idea of determining the intensity of review are explicitly justified. Hence, the notion and structure of balancing competences organize the margin of appreciation in a way to free it from its main criticisms and fulfill the argumentative potential it has.","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Balancing Competences and the Margin of Appreciation: Structuring Deference at the ECtHR\",\"authors\":\"C. A. Chagas\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/icl-2021-0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The margin of appreciation is an important argumentative framework employed by the ECtHR. Through its application, the Court may establish a balanced relationship with the member states. This is why the margin is one of the main sources for the ECtHR’s exercise of deference. Deference happens when low intensity of review is applied – or a wide margin. Therefore, to properly know when to act deferentially demands a clear procedure to determine the intensity of review. However, the application of the margin still presents some weak points and lacks consistency. In this paper, I defend the possibility of applying formal balancing to provide a clearer structure for the exercise of the margin of appreciation and, thus, a way to improve deferential practices by the ECtHR. With the clear structure of balancing, factors are employed in a more organized manner and the relationships behind the idea of determining the intensity of review are explicitly justified. Hence, the notion and structure of balancing competences organize the margin of appreciation in a way to free it from its main criticisms and fulfill the argumentative potential it has.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41321,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2021-0009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2021-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

升值幅度是欧洲人权委员会采用的一个重要论证框架。通过适用该法,法院可以与成员国建立平衡的关系。这就是为什么差额是欧洲人权法院行使尊重的主要来源之一。当审查的强度较低时,或者审查幅度较大时,就会产生顺从。因此,要正确地知道何时采取恭敬的行动,就需要一个明确的程序来确定审查的强度。但是,余量的运用仍然存在一些薄弱环节,缺乏一致性。在本文中,我为应用正式平衡的可能性进行辩护,以提供一个更清晰的结构来行使升值幅度,从而改善欧洲人权委员会的尊重做法。有了清晰的平衡结构,就可以更有组织地使用各种因素,确定审查强度的想法背后的关系也就得到了明确的证明。因此,平衡能力的概念和结构以一种将其从主要批评中解放出来并发挥其论证潜力的方式组织了欣赏边际。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Balancing Competences and the Margin of Appreciation: Structuring Deference at the ECtHR
Abstract The margin of appreciation is an important argumentative framework employed by the ECtHR. Through its application, the Court may establish a balanced relationship with the member states. This is why the margin is one of the main sources for the ECtHR’s exercise of deference. Deference happens when low intensity of review is applied – or a wide margin. Therefore, to properly know when to act deferentially demands a clear procedure to determine the intensity of review. However, the application of the margin still presents some weak points and lacks consistency. In this paper, I defend the possibility of applying formal balancing to provide a clearer structure for the exercise of the margin of appreciation and, thus, a way to improve deferential practices by the ECtHR. With the clear structure of balancing, factors are employed in a more organized manner and the relationships behind the idea of determining the intensity of review are explicitly justified. Hence, the notion and structure of balancing competences organize the margin of appreciation in a way to free it from its main criticisms and fulfill the argumentative potential it has.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
A Paradigm Shift for Hong Kong’s National Security Constitution – A Comparative Study of the Impact of Its National Security Law B R Ambedkar’s Multiple Consciousness and the Framing of the Indian Constitution You Cannot Have the Cake and Eat It – How to Reconcile Liberal Fundamental Rights with Answers to the Climate Crisis The Politics of Silence: Hannah Arendt and Future Generations’ Fight for the Climate A Reflection on the Methods of Interpretation of EU Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1