Search
Generic filters
31 October 2024

Maintaining Resilience in Human Rights Interpretation

In the Religious Movement Advisory Opinion, the European Court of Human Rights established detailed risk and proportionality assessment criteria that deviate from its previous case law in individual applications. The Court thus seems eager to embrace its standard-setting role and the spirit of dialogue inherent in the advisory opinion procedure, indicating some potential for resilience in rights interpretation within this sensitive context. Continue reading >>
0
04 April 2024
,

Strengthening the Resilience of the Rule of Law through Democracy

For almost a decade now, the European Union (EU) has been struggling with the erosion of the rule of law in some of its Member States. The IEP explored the various pillars of the rule of law resilience, culminating in the recent RESILIO report. Unsurprisingly, the independent judiciary and effective public administration prove to be key for the functioning of the rule of law. To remain resilient, the rule of law needs a solid democratic political culture anchored in a robust civil society, independent media, and a sound public debate. Henceforth, a long-term investment in democracy is the best way to strengthen the resilience of the rule of law. Continue reading >>
0
05 March 2024

Trump and the American Problem of the Commons

Americans missed another opportunity on Monday to reduce the threat Donald Trump presents to constitutional democracy in the United States and in other countries. The Supreme Court in Trump v. Anderson unanimously overturned decisions that held Trump ineligible to run for the Presidency. Three justices acknowledged that Trump is an “oathbreaking insurrectionist.” None challenged that Trump committed treason on January 6. Nevertheless, in an unsigned per curium opinion that had some basis in policy, but little or no foundation in the constitutional text or history of the Fourteenth Amendment, the justices ruled that states had no power to determine whether persons were eligible for the presidency under Section 3. Continue reading >>
Go to Top