Aleksandar Todorović
10.5937/AnaliPFB1701187T
Purpose of this article is to revisit the traditional notion of subsidiarity as a principle based on a political compromise aimed at conservation of state sovereignty and affirmation of pluralism and diversity by pointing out that subsidiarity has become a deep structural principle embedded in Convention’s supervisory mechanism which outlines the role of the Court in European human rights regime. Furthermore article will argue that subsidiarity incorporates both ascending (negative) and descending (positive) element while questioning validity of the member states argument that Court is overstepping its own competences prescribed by the Convention. Lastly author will elaborate how both, negative and positive, aspects of principle of subsidiarity can be used in resolving ECtHR backlog and explore what instruments are at Court’s disposal when asserting „positive subsidiarity“.
- Caroza, P. „Supsidiarity as a structural principle of international human rights law“, The American Journal of International Law 97/1997, Washington DC.
- Greer, S. „Constitutionalizing adjudication under the European Convention on Human Rights“, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 23/2003, Oxford.
- Morawa, A. „The European Court of Human Rights Rejection of Petitions where the aplicant Has Not Suffered a Significant Disadvantage“, Journal of transnational legal issues 1/2012, Luzern.
- Wildhaber, L. „Pilot Judgments in Cases of Structural or Systemic Problems on the National Level“, The European Court of Human Rights Overwhelmed by Applications: Problems and Possible Solutions, Springer Verlag, Berlin 2009.
Comments are closed.