Abstract

The second decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the Lautsi case on crucifixes in Italian state-school classrooms is almost entirely grounded on the margin of appreciation doctrine. This article describes the doctrine as developed by the European Court of Human Rights and, on the basis of the distinction between 'hard cases' and 'easy cases', attempts to show one counter-intuitive consequence of the doctrine. Taken seriously, the doctrine seems to imply that the European Court of Human Rights is the exemplar of a court that enjoys no discretion. This construction cannot be accepted. Two other reconstructions are more plausible: the margin of appreciation can be considered as a canon of interpretation or, alternatively, as a proportion- ality test. The present article argues that both reconstructions entail certain normative consequences for the way in which the European Court should have reasoned in the Lautsi case.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.