Is the European Court of Human Rights walking back rights?

Mads Andenas takes issue with the argument that the European Court of Human Rights has recently been ‘walking back’ rights. His recent research, with Alec Stone Sweet and Wayne Sandholtz demonstrates that the European Court has not in fact been walking back rights in Europe. Instead of walking rights back, the European Court has simply chosen not to move forward. It is a realistic and sustainable position for the European Court to emphasise the importance of restraint, but also to take a robust approach where there has been a breach of rights. Andenas argues that a similar dynamic can be observed in the United Kingdom at present: the judiciary is under an unusual degree of pressure and its response has been to signal that the judiciary is able to exercise self-restraint and at the same time to draw a line in the sands as regards core values, such as the important (and unappreciated) value of the rule of law. But, Andenas argues, we should question legal scholarship that goes too far in urging restraint: there is a danger of undermining the judicial process. Discussants: Gavin Phillipson & Freya Baetens Chair: Kate O'Regan