Recalibrating the ‘Strict Obligations’ Requirement of the Bosphorus Doctrine of Equivalent Protection: The Strasbourg Court vis-à-vis the EU Principle of Mutual Trust

Abstract

Bosphorus doctrine of equivalent protection activated when states implement strict international organisations’ obligations – EU principle of mutual trust requires executing member states to presume issuing member states’ human rights compliance – Presumption influences the Bosphorus doctrine’s application – The European Court of Human Rights drew four relevant scenarios (full discretion; strict obligations; qualified discretion; EU law breach) – Case law consistent with Bosphorus logic but unfair to applicants – Court’s subsequent recalibration of ‘strict obligations’ requirement renders it moot, empties Bosphorus doctrine of its substance and equally undermines mutual trust regimes – Absence of equivalence of mutual trust regimes or EU accession to the ECHR as sole remedies