谁误解了升值幅度?回复伊娃·布莱姆斯

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Marisa Iglesias Vila
{"title":"谁误解了升值幅度?回复伊娃·布莱姆斯","authors":"Marisa Iglesias Vila","doi":"10.1093/icon/moad066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This reply offers some critical reflections that tie into the assumptions of Eva Brem’s interesting study of the risk of national authorities’ misunderstandings of the margin of appreciation conceded by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Taking on board a cooperative conception of the principle of subsidiarity, this reply first questions the adequacy of the distinction between a systemic and a normative dimension of the margin of appreciation as the proper basis for assessing the risk of domestic misunderstanding of the margin of appreciation. Next, it raises some objections to the analysis that Brems makes of the ECtHR judgment in S.A.S. v. France, particularly her application of the normative dimension of the margin of appreciation to this example of possible misunderstanding. The reply argues that Brems’s assumption that the ECtHR conducted a procedural rationality review of the French burqa ban minimizes Strasbourg’s own contribution to the risk that other states, in similar cases, may misunderstand how human rights are to be applied to avoid misinterpreting their national margin of appreciation.","PeriodicalId":51599,"journal":{"name":"Icon-International Journal of Constitutional Law","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who misunderstands the margin of appreciation? A reply to Eva Brems\",\"authors\":\"Marisa Iglesias Vila\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/icon/moad066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This reply offers some critical reflections that tie into the assumptions of Eva Brem’s interesting study of the risk of national authorities’ misunderstandings of the margin of appreciation conceded by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Taking on board a cooperative conception of the principle of subsidiarity, this reply first questions the adequacy of the distinction between a systemic and a normative dimension of the margin of appreciation as the proper basis for assessing the risk of domestic misunderstanding of the margin of appreciation. Next, it raises some objections to the analysis that Brems makes of the ECtHR judgment in S.A.S. v. France, particularly her application of the normative dimension of the margin of appreciation to this example of possible misunderstanding. The reply argues that Brems’s assumption that the ECtHR conducted a procedural rationality review of the French burqa ban minimizes Strasbourg’s own contribution to the risk that other states, in similar cases, may misunderstand how human rights are to be applied to avoid misinterpreting their national margin of appreciation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Icon-International Journal of Constitutional Law\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Icon-International Journal of Constitutional Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/moad066\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Icon-International Journal of Constitutional Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/moad066","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇回复提供了一些批判性的思考,这些思考与Eva Brem关于国家当局误解欧洲人权法院(ECtHR)承认的升值幅度的风险的有趣研究的假设有关。考虑到辅助性原则的合作概念,本答复首先质疑将升值幅度的系统维度和规范维度区分为评估国内对升值幅度误解风险的适当基础是否足够。接下来,它对Brems对欧洲人权法院S.A.S.诉法国案判决的分析提出了一些反对意见,特别是她将升值幅度的规范维度应用于这个可能存在误解的例子。该答复辩称,布雷姆斯的假设是欧洲人权法院对法国布卡禁令进行了程序合理性审查,这将斯特拉斯堡自己对其他国家在类似情况下可能误解如何适用人权以避免误解其国家升值幅度的风险的贡献降到最低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Who misunderstands the margin of appreciation? A reply to Eva Brems
Abstract This reply offers some critical reflections that tie into the assumptions of Eva Brem’s interesting study of the risk of national authorities’ misunderstandings of the margin of appreciation conceded by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Taking on board a cooperative conception of the principle of subsidiarity, this reply first questions the adequacy of the distinction between a systemic and a normative dimension of the margin of appreciation as the proper basis for assessing the risk of domestic misunderstanding of the margin of appreciation. Next, it raises some objections to the analysis that Brems makes of the ECtHR judgment in S.A.S. v. France, particularly her application of the normative dimension of the margin of appreciation to this example of possible misunderstanding. The reply argues that Brems’s assumption that the ECtHR conducted a procedural rationality review of the French burqa ban minimizes Strasbourg’s own contribution to the risk that other states, in similar cases, may misunderstand how human rights are to be applied to avoid misinterpreting their national margin of appreciation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
67
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信