This article examines the connection between rights, courts, and the changing nature of democratic participation. The general comparative model developed is then applied to a time-series analysis of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The article is the first to offer a systematic social science analysis of ECHR decisions with particular emphasis on changing democratic opportunities for individuals at both the domestic and supranational level. The findings reveal how rights and access to legal institutions shape the way courts serve as arenas for public participation—a consequence that brings into question dominant theories of international organization and comparative studies of judicial politics.
Alter, Karen. (2001). Establishing the supremacy of European Law: The making of an international rule of law in Europe. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
2.
Alter, Karen. (2006). Private litigants and new international courts. Comparative Political Studies, 39(1), 22-49.
3.
Bickel, Alexander. (1962). The least dangerous branch: The Supreme Court at the bar of American politics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
4.
Black, Charles. (1960). The people and the court. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
5.
Bobbitt, Philip. (1982). Constitutional fate. New York: Oxford University Press.
6.
Boyle, Elizabeth H., & Thompson, Melissa. (2001). National politics and resort to the European Commission on Human Rights. Law & Society Review, 35, 321-344.
7.
Burley, Anne-Marie & Mattli, Walter. (1993). Europe before the court: A political theory of legal integration. International Organization, 47, 41-76.
8.
Casper, Jonathan D. (1976). The Supreme Court and national policy making. American Political Science Review, 70, 50-63.
9.
Cichowski, Rachel A. (1998). Integrating the environment: The European court and the construction of supranational policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 5(3), 387-405.
10.
Cichowski, Rachel A. (2004). Women’s rights, the European court and supranational constitutionalism. Law & Society Review, 38, 489-512.
11.
Cichowski, Rachel A. (2006). The European court, civil society and European integration. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12.
Cichowski, Rachel, & Stone Sweet, Alec. (2003). Participation, representative democracy and the courts. In B. Cain, R. Dalton, & S. Scarrow, (Eds.), Democracy transformed? Expanding political opportunities in advanced industrial democracies (pp. 192-220). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
13.
Conant, Lisa. (2002). Justice contained: Law and politics in the European Union. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
14.
Council of Europe. (1955-2004). Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Commission and European Court of Human Rights.
15.
Council of Europe. (1959-1998). Effects of judgments of cases.
16.
Council of Europe. (1960-2004). Reports of judgments and decisions/European Court of Human Rights.
17.
Council of Europe. (2002). Analysis of the court’s case-law in 2001. Retrieved October 10, 2004, from http://www.echr.coe.int/ECHR/
18.
Council of Europe. (2005). Human rights: Execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. Retrieved June 15, 2005, from http://www.coe.int/T/E/Human_rights/execution/01_introduction/
19.
Dahl, Robert. (1957). The concept of power. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.
20.
Dahl, Robert. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
21.
Dalton, Russell. (2002). Citizen politics: Public opinion and political parties in advanced industrial democracies (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
22.
Dalton, Russell, Scarrow, Susan, & Cain, Bruce. (Eds.). (2003). New forms of democracy? Reform and transformation of democratic institutions. In Democracy transformed? Expanding political opportunities in advanced industrial democracies (pp.1-20). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
23.
Derbyshire County Council v. Times Newspapers Ltd. (1992) 1 QB 770.
24.
Drzemczewski, Andrew, & Nowicki, Marek Antoni. (2001). Poland. In R. Blackburn & J. Polakiewicz (Eds.), Fundamental rights in Europe: The European Convention on Human Rights and its member states (1950-2000) (pp. 657-679). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
25.
Dworkin, Robert. (1977). Taking rights seriously. London, UK: Duckworths.
26.
Ellis, Evelyn. (1998). European community sex equality law (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
27.
Elster, John. (1998). Deliberative democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
28.
Epstein, Lee, Knight, Jack, & Shvetsova, Olga. (2001). The role of constitutional courts in the establishment and maintenance of democratic systems of government. Law & Society Review, 35, 117-163.
29.
European Court of Human Rights. (1971). Ringeisen Case, Application No. 2614/65.
30.
European Court of Human Rights. (1975). Golder Case, Application No. 4451/70.
31.
European Court of Human Rights. (1979a). Airey Case, Application No. 6289/73.
32.
European Court of Human Rights. (1979b). Sunday Times Case, Application No. 6538/74.
33.
European Court of Human Rights. (1987a). Boden Case, Application No. 10930/84.
34.
European Court of Human Rights. (1987b). Pudas Case, Application No. 10426/83.
35.
European Court of Human Rights. (1991). Cruz Varas Case, Application No. 15576/89.
36.
European Court of Human Rights. (1994a). Hentrich Case, Application No. 13616/88.
37.
European Court of Human Rights. (1994b). Holy Monasteries Case, Application Nos. 13092/87, 13984/88.
38.
European Court of Human Rights. (1995). Nasri Case, Application No. 19465/92.
39.
European Court of Human Rights. (1996). Chahal Case, Application No. 22414/93.
40.
European Court of Human Rights. (1997). De Haan Case, Application No. 22839/93.
41.
European Court of Human Rights. (1998). Sidiropoulos Case, Application No. 26695/95.
42.
European Court of Human Rights. (1999a). Bouilly Case, Application No. 38952/97.
43.
European Court of Human Rights. (1999b). Pelissier & Sassi Case, Application No. 25444/94.
44.
European Court of Human Rights. (1999c). Pellegrin Case, Application No. 28541/95.
45.
European Court of Human Rights. (1999d). Pesoni Case, Application No. 39694/98.
46.
European Court of Human Rights. (2000a). Caliri Case, Application No. 41817/98.
47.
European Court of Human Rights. (2000b). Mosca Case, Application No. 41810/98.
48.
European Court of Human Rights. (2001a). Bozhilov Case, Application o. 41978/98.
49.
European Court of Human Rights. (2001b). Ferrazzini Case, Application No. 44759/98.
50.
European Court of Human Rights. (2001c). Kress Case, Application No. 39594/98.
51.
European Court of Human Rights. (2001d). Yagtzilar & Others Case, ApplicationNo.41727/98.
52.
European Court of Human Rights. (2002). Albergamo Case, Application No.44392/98.
53.
European Court of Human Rights. (2003). Widmann Case, Application No. 42032/98.
54.
European Court of Human Rights. (2004). Yorgiyadis Case, Application No. 48057/99.
55.
Galanter, Marc. (1974). Why the ‘haves’ come out ahead: Speculations on the limits of legal change. Law & Society Review, 9, 95-160.
56.
Galanter, Marc. (1983). The radiating effects of courts. In K. Boyum & L. Mather (Eds.), Empirical theories of courts (pp. 117-142). New York: Longman.
57.
Ginsburg, Tom. (2003). Judicial review in new democracies: Constitutional courts in Asian cases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
58.
Glendon, Mary Ann. (1991). Rights talk: The impoverishment of political discourse. New York: Free Press.
59.
Glendon, M., Wallace, M., & Osakwe, C. (1994). Comparative legal traditions: Text, materials and cases (2nd ed.). St. Paul, MN: West.
60.
Graber, Mark A. (1993). The non-majority difficulty: Legislative deference to the judiciary. Studies in American Political Development, 7, 35-72.
61.
Guiraudon, V. (2000). European courts and foreigners rights. International Migration Review, 34, 1088-1125.
62.
Harding, Christopher. (1980). The private interest in challenging community action. European Law Review, 5, 354.
Helfer, Lawrence, & Slaughter, Anne-Marie. (1997). Towards a theory of effective supranational adjudication. Yale Law Journal, 107(2), 273-391.
65.
Hirschl, Ran. (2004). Toward juristocracy: The origins and consequences of the new constitutionalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
66.
Horowitz, D. L. (1977). The courts and social reform. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
67.
Hoskyns, Catherine. (1996). Integrating gender: Women, law and politics in the European Union. London: Verso.
68.
Inglehart, Ronald. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic and political change in 43 societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
69.
Kenney, Sally J., Reisinger, William, & Reitz, John. (1999). Introduction: Constitutional dialogues in comparative perspective. In S. Kenney, W. Reisinger, & J. Reitz (Eds.), Constitutional dialogues in comparative perspective (pp. 1-7). New York: St. Martin’s.
70.
Keohane, Robert, Moravcsik, Andrew, & Slaughter, Anne-Marie. (2000). Legalized dispute resolution: Interstate and transnational. International Organization, 54(3), 457-488.
71.
Larkin, Christopher M. (1996). Judicial independence and democratization: A theoretical and conceptual analysis. American Journal of Comparative Law, 44, 605-626.
72.
Loveland, Ian. (1999). Incorporating the European Convention on human rights into UK Law. Parliamentary Affairs, 52, 113-127.
73.
Lovell, George. (2003). Legislative deferrals: Statutory ambiguity, judicial power, and American democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
74.
McAdam, Doug, McCarthy, John D., & Zald, Mayer N. (1996). Introduction: Opportunities, mobilizing structures, and framing processes? Toward a synthetic, comparative perspective on social movements. In D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements (pp.1-20). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
75.
McCann, Michael W. (1994). Rights at work: Pay equity reform and the politics of legal mobilization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
76.
Medda-Windischer, Roberta. (2003). The European Court of Human Rights and minority rights. Journal of European Integration, 25, 249-272.
77.
Minow, Martha (1990). Making all the difference: Inclusion, exclusion and American law. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
78.
Moravcsik, Andrew. (2000). The origins of human rights regimes: Democratic delegation in postwar Europe. International Organization, 54, 217-252.
79.
O’Donnell, Guillermo, A. (2001). Democracy, law and comparative politics. Studies in Comparative International Development, 36(1), 7-36.
80.
Polakiewcz, Jorg. (1996). The application of the European Convention on human rights in domestic law. Human Rights Law Journal, 17, 405-411.
81.
Polakiewcz, Jorg, & Jacob-Folzter, Valerie. (1991a). The European Human Rights Convention in domestic law. Human Rights Law Journal, 12(3), 65-85.
82.
Polakiewcz, Jorg, & Jacob-Folzter, Valerie. (1991b). The European Human Rights Convention in domestic law. Human Rights Law Journal, 12(4), 125-142.
83.
R v. Chief Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Choudhurry. (1991) 1 QB 429.
84.
Rasmussen, H. (1980). Why is Article 173 interpreted against private plaintiffs?European Law Review, 5, 112-127.
85.
Rosenberg, Gerald. (1991). Can courts bring about social change?Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
86.
Rubenfeld, Jed. (2004). Unilateralism and constitutionalism. New York University Law Review, 79, 1971-2028.
87.
Scheingold, Stuart. (1974). The politics of rights: Lawyers, public policy and political change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
88.
Shapiro, Martin. (1981). Courts: A comparative and political analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
89.
Shapiro, Martin. (2002). The success of judicial review and democracy. In M. Shapiro & A. Stone Sweet, On law, politics and judicialization. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
90.
Sterett, Susan. (1994). Judicial review in Britain. Comparative Political Studies, 26, 421-442.
91.
Sterett, Susan. (1997). Creating constitutionalism. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
92.
Stone Sweet, Alec. (2000). Governing with judges. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
93.
Stone Sweet, Alec. (2004). The judicial construction of Europe. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
94.
Stone Sweet, Alec, & Brunell, Tom. (1998). Constructing a supranational constitution: Dispute resolution and governance in the European community. American Political Science Review, 92, 63-81.
95.
Tarrow, Sidney. (1998). Power in movement: Social movements and contentious politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
96.
Tate, C. Neal, & Vallinder, Torbjorn. (1995). The global expansion of judical power: The judicialization of politics. In C.N. Tate & T. Vallinder (Eds.), The global expansion of judical power (pp.1-10). New York: New York University Press.
97.
Tilly, Charles. (1978). From mobilization to revolution. New York: McGraw-Hill.
98.
Tushnet, Mark. (1984). An essay on rights. Texas Law Review, 62, 1363-1403.
99.
Weiler, Joseph H. H. (1991). The transformation of Europe. Yale Law Journal, 100, 2403-2483.
100.
Zemans, Frances. (1983). Legal mobilization: The neglected role of the law in political systems. American Political Science Review, 77, 690-703.
