A Traffic-Light System of State Arguments before the European Court of Human Rights

Abstract

Abstract Despite an often-tense relationship between Contracting Parties and those who administer the echr, the atmosphere within the Court remains relatively peaceful. I suggest that this harmony is the result of a traffic-light system of state arguments: ‘green’ for acceptable orthodox arguments, ‘amber’ for more dubious submissions, and ‘red’ for contentions that exceed the parameters of appropriate conduct. Using Stanley Fish’s theory of interpretive communities, I contend that the determining factor behind the acceptability of an argument is the reaction that it receives from the other stakeholders within the Convention system. The harmony is therefore the product of an implicit system of internal regulation. While this stability is to be celebrated, given the present global backlash against human rights, and ‘Strasbourg bashing’ more specifically, it is not to be taken for granted.