Judicial Independence and Accountability in the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights

Abstract

This chapter assesses various aspects of judicial independence, judicial accountability and the election and selection of judges as reflected by the experiences of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). History shows that independence is a common principle and tradition of European constitutionalism. It has been implemented and balanced with accountability through reforms conditioned by standards of soft law from the Council of Europe and by case law of the ECtHR. The puzzle of rules that frame personal and institutional independence and accountability shows remaining problems and differences between international and constitutional judges. Election procedures balance personal independence with institutional accountability, but the supporting European consensus suffers populist threats to human rights protection.