Dismantling the iron-cage: the discursive persistence and legal failure of a “Bureaucratic Rational” construction of the admissibility decision-making of the European Court of Human Rights

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Over the last decade, the admissibility decision-making of the European Court of Human Rights has been the focus of considerable attention in the analysis of the “mounting pressure on the Convention system,” but has enjoyed little critical analysis in legal, sociological or socio-legal literatures. This paper will argue that this combination of intense attention and critical neglect is paradoxical, and has produced fascinating and hitherto largely unnoticed discontinuities and incompatibilities between the rhetorical representation of the Court's admissibility decision-making in ongoing Convention reform debates and the published jurisprudence of the Court on those standards of admissibility.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1786-1812
Number of pages27
JournalGerman Law Journal
Volume12
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2011

Keywords

  • human rights
  • European Court of Human Rights

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Dismantling the iron-cage: the discursive persistence and legal failure of a “Bureaucratic Rational” construction of the admissibility decision-making of the European Court of Human Rights'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this