You are looking at 1 - 7 of 7 items

  • Author or Editor: Wayne Sandholtz x
Clear All Modify Search
You do not have access to this content

Wayne Sandholtz

The promise of international human rights law has been that universal standards would elevate local rights practices.  But international human rights norms make a difference when they are internalized and integrated into domestic institutions.  The chapter argues that regional human rights systems can promote that integration in ways that global mechanisms (human rights treaty bodies, the International Criminal Court) cannot.  Regional human rights systems can integrate with domestic legal institutions when: (1) regional rights treaties are incorporated into domestic law; (2) regional courts regularly scrutinize and condemn national practices that fall short of regional standards; and (3) domestic institutions internalize the decisions of the regional court in interpreting and applying domestic law.  A comparison of the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American System of Human Rights explores the conditions under which integrated regional human rights systems emerge and develop. The author suggest that the courts’ strategies for extending rights depend on the level of human rights fulfillment in the member states (their politico-legal contexts) and the type or status of the rights concerned, distinguishing between qualified and non-derogable rights.

This content is available to you

Edited by Wayne Sandholtz and Christopher A. Whytock

This content is available to you

Edited by Wayne Sandholtz and Christopher A. Whytock

This content is available to you

Wayne Sandholtz and Christopher A. Whytock

You do not have access to this content

Edited by Wayne Sandholtz and Christopher A. Whytock

What is the relationship between politics and international law? Inspired by comparative politics and socio-legal studies, this Research Handbook develops a novel framework for comparative analysis of politics and international law at different stages of governance and in different governance systems. It applies the framework in a wide range of fields—from human rights and environmental standards, to cyber conflict and intellectual property—to show how the relationship between politics and international law varies depending on the sites where it unfolds.
You do not have access to this content

Wayne Sandholtz and Adam Feldman

The European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights apply their respective regional treaties. But they also view the regional rights systems as embedded in a global human rights regime and interpret regional rights in light of broader international human rights norms. In doing so, they sometimes cite each other, importing and exporting human rights ideas and principles. Though the decisions of one court do not constitute formal precedent in another, we argue that cross-citations among them play a coordinating role. The regional human rights courts are thus constructing a nascent trans-regional human rights jurisprudence, an emerging frontier in international human rights.

You do not have access to this content

Backlash and international human rights courts

Crisis, Accountability, and Opportunity

Wayne Sandholtz, Yining Bei and Kayla Caldwell

Non-compliance with, and criticism of, the decisions of international human rights courts are commonplace. Sometimes states seek to curtail a court’s authority, by pruning its competences, withdrawing from its jurisdiction, or shutting it down altogether. This chapter examines these more aggressive forms of backlash against three prominent international courts: the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), and the International Criminal Court (ICC). Governments are more likely to engage in backlash against an international human rights court the more its decisions are seen by national leaders as harming their domestic political interests.