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

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

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Constitutional Law Review
Published
2024-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s157401962400018x
Primary Topic
European Criminal Justice and Data Protection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

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

Vassilis Pergantis
European Constitutional Law Review
European Criminal Justice and Data Protection
article

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

Vassilis Pergantis
article en

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

European Constitutional Law ReviewVol. 20(3)
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR)
European Commission, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
Openalex Percentile: Top 75%
European Criminal Justice and Data Protection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.