Abstract
The article argues that the principle of proportionality—a legal tool widely used for balancing competing rights—can be perceived as a threat to criminal-law-related fundamental rights, i.e. mainly the nullum crimen sine lege and ne bis in idem principles. A case study is carried out, of A and B v Norway, Tsonyo Tsonev v Bulgaria (no 4) and Saquetti Iglesias v Spain ECtHR judgments, as well as P16-2021-001 ECtHR advisory opinion and Menci CJEU ruling, heavily relying on the rule-principle distinction (as presented by Ronald Dworkin and Robert Alexy). The conclusion stemming from the study can be described as follows: in some instances ‘inserting’ proportionality into the content of fundamental rights might be inappropriate, i.e. dogmatically flawed and detrimental to the effective protection of these rights.
Published Version
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