Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-5kfdg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-31T23:22:38.828Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

International Courts as Agents of Legal Change: Evidence from LGBT Rights in Europe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2013

Laurence R. Helfer  and
Erik Voeten
Laurence R. Helfer
Affiliation:
Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. E-mail: helfer@law.duke.edu
Erik Voeten
Affiliation:
Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, Washington, DC. E-mail: ev42@georgetown.edu
Get access

Abstract

Do international court judgments influence the behavior of actors other than the parties to a dispute? Are international courts agents of policy change or do their judgments merely reflect evolving social and political trends? We develop a theory that specifies the conditions under which international courts can use their interpretive discretion to have system-wide effects. We examine the theory in the context of European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rulings on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) issues by creating a new data set that matches these rulings with laws in all Council of Europe (CoE) member states. We also collect data on LGBT policies unaffected by ECtHR judgments to control for the confounding effect of evolving trends in national policies. We find that ECtHR judgments against one country substantially increase the probability of national-level policy change across Europe. The marginal effects of the judgments are especially high where public acceptance of sexual minorities is low, but where national courts can rely on ECtHR precedents to invalidate domestic laws or where the government in power is not ideologically opposed to LGBT equality. We conclude by exploring the implications of our findings for other international courts.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 68 , Issue 1 , January 2014 , pp. 77 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adamczyk, Amy, and Pitt, Cassady. 2009. Shaping Attitudes About Homosexuality: The Role of Religion and Cultural Context. Social Science Research 38 (2):338–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alter, Karen J. 2009. The European Court's Political Power: Selected Essays. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Alter, Karen J., and Helfer, Laurence R.. 2010. Nature or Nurture: Judicial Lawmaking in the European Court of Justice and the Andean Tribunal of Justice. International Organization 64 (4):563–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alter, Karen J., and Meunier-Aitsahalia, Sophie. 1994. Judicial Politics in the European Community: European Integration and the Pathbreaking Cassis de Dijon Decision. Comparative Political Studies 26 (4):535–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anagnostou, Dia, and Psychogiopoulou, Evangelia, eds. 2010. The European Court of Human Rights and the Rights of Marginalised Individuals and Minorities in National Context. Leiden, the Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill NV.Google Scholar
Beck, Nathaniel, and Katz, Jonathan N.. 2007. Random Coefficient Models and Time-Series–Cross-Section Data: Monte Carlo Experiments. Political Analysis 15 (2):182–95.Google Scholar
Behan, Cormac, and O'Donnell, Ian. 2008. Prisoners, Politics and the Polls: Enfranchisement and the Burden of Responsibility. British Journal of Criminology 48 (3):319–36.Google Scholar
Besson, Samantha. 2011. The Erga Omnes Effect of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights—What's in a Name? In The European Court of Human Rights After Protocol 14: First Assessment and Perspectives, edited by Besson, Samantha, 125–75. Geneva: Schulthess.Google Scholar
Binder, Christina, 2011. The Prohibition of Amnesties by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. German Law Journal 12 (5):1203–30.Google Scholar
Blackburn, Robert, and Polakiewicz, Jörg, eds. 2001. Fundamental Rights in Europe: The European Convention on Human Rights and Its Member States, 1950–2000. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bob, Clifford. 2012. The Global Right Wing and the Clash of World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewster, Rachel. 2009. Unpacking the State's Reputation. Harvard International Law Journal 50 (2):231–69.Google Scholar
Burley, Anne-Marie, and Mattli, Walter. 1993. Europe Before the Court: A Political Theory of Legal Integration. International Organization 47 (1):41–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busch, Marc L. 2007. Overlapping Institutions, Forum Shopping, and Dispute Settlement in International Trade. International Organization 61 (4):735–61.Google Scholar
Carter, David, and Signorino, Curtis. 2010. Back to the Future: Modeling Time Dependence in Binary Data. Political Analysis 18 (3):271–92.Google Scholar
Cichowski, Rachel A. 2007. The European Court and Civil Society: Litigation, Mobilization and Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights. 2010. Strengthening Subsidiarity—Integrating the Court's Case-Law into National Law and Judicial Practice. Skopje, Macedonia, 1–2 October. Google Scholar
Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly. 1993a. Honouring of Commitments Entered into by New Member States. Order No. 488, 29 June. Available at ⟨http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Doc/XrefViewHTML.asp?FileID=7253&Language=en⟩. Accessed 12 August 2013.Google Scholar
Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly. 1993b. Report on the Application by Romania for Membership of the Council of Europe. Doc. 6901, 19 July. Available at ⟨http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Doc/XrefViewHTML.asp?FileID=7253&Language=en⟩. Accessed 23 October 2012.Google Scholar
Dai, Xinyuan. 2005. Why Comply? The Domestic Constituency Mechanism. International Organization 59 (2):363–98.Google Scholar
Downs, George W., and Jones, Michael A.. 2002. Reputation, Compliance, and International Law. Journal of Legal Studies 31 (S1):S95–S114.Google Scholar
Downs, George, Rocke, David M., and Barsoom, Peter N.. 1996. Is the Good News About Compliance Good News About Cooperation? International Organization 50 (3):379–406.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2012. Eurobarometer 66.1 (September–October 2006). TNS Opinion and Social, Brussels, Belgium. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne, Germany. ZA4526 Data File Version 1.0.1. Google Scholar
European Values Study. 2011. European Values Study 1981–2008, Longitudinal Data File. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne, Germany. ZA4804 Data File Version 2.0.0. Available at ⟨http://www.europeanvaluesstudy.eu/evs/surveys/survey-1999-2000.html⟩. Accessed 12 August 2013.Google Scholar
Gärditz, Klaus Ferdinand. 2007. International Decisions: Case Nos. 2 BvR 2115/01, 2 BvR 2132/01, & 2 BvR 348/03. American Journal of International Law 101 (3):627–35.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Tom. 2005. Bounded Discretion in International Judicial Lawmaking. Virginia Journal of International Law 45 (3):631–73.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Tom, and Versteeg, Mila. 2013. Why Do Countries Adopt Constitutional Review? Journal of Law, Economics and Organization. Published electronically 23 July. doi:10.1093/jleo/ewt008. Google Scholar
Guzman, Andrew T. 2008. How International Law Works: A Rational Choice Theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., and Tsutsui, Kiyoteru. 2007. Justice Lost! The Failure of International Human Rights Law to Matter Where Needed Most. Journal of Peace Research 44 (4):407–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, Darren, and Jacoby, Wade. 2010. Partial Compliance: A Comparison of the European and Inter-American Courts for Human Rights. Journal of International Law and International Relations 6 (1):35–85.Google Scholar
Helfer, Laurence R. 1993. Consensus, Coherence and the European Convention on Human Rights. Cornell International Law Journal 26 (1):133–65.Google Scholar
Helfer, Laurence R. 2008. Redesigning the European Court of Human Rights: Embeddedness as a Deep Structural Principle of the European Human Rights Regime. European Journal of International Law 19 (1):125–59.Google Scholar
Helfer, Laurence R., Alter, Karen J., and Guerzovich, M. Florencia. 2009. Islands of Effective International Adjudication: Constructing an Intellectual Property Rule of Law in the Andean Community. American Journal of International Law 103 (1):1–47.Google Scholar
Hillebrecht, Courtney. 2012. Implementing International Human Rights Law at Home: Domestic Politics and the European Court of Human Rights. Human Rights Review 13 (3):279–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holzhacker, Ronald. 1999. Labor Unions and Sexual Diversity in Germany. In Laboring for Rights: Unions and Sexual Diversity Across Nations, edited by Hunt, Gerald, 238–52. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Howse, Robert L., and Teitel, Ruti. 2010. Beyond Compliance: Rethinking Why International Law Really Matters. Global Policy 1 (2):127–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huneeus, Alexandra. 2011. Courts Resisting Courts: Lessons from the Inter-American Court's Struggle to Enforce Human Rights. Cornell International Law Journal 44 (3):493–533.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Robert, and Baker, Wayne E.. 2000. Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values. American Sociological Review 65 (1):19–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISSP Research Group. 2011. International Social Survey Programme: Religion, 1991, 1998, 2008. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne, Germany. ZA5070 Data File Version 1.0.0. Google Scholar
Johnson, Paul. 2012. Homosexuality and the European Court of Human Rights. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kanargelidis, Jeffrey. 2005. New Anti-Dumping Rules Applied by Canada—The “Zeroing” Debate. Mondaq Business Briefing, 7 September. Available at ⟨http://www.mondaq.com/canada/x/34716/Export+controls+Trade+Investment+Sanctions/New+AntiDumping+Rules+Applied+By+Canada+The+Zeroing+Debate⟩. Accessed 9 July 2012.Google Scholar
Keller, Helen, and Stone Sweet, Alec. 2008. A Europe of Rights: The Impact of the ECHR on National Legal Systems. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kelley, Judith G. 2004. International Actors on the Domestic Scene: Membership Conditionality and Socialization by International Institutions. International Organization 58 (3):425–57.Google Scholar
Khosla, Madhav. 2011. Inclusive Constitutional Comparison: Reflections on India's Sodomy Decision. American Journal of Comparative Law 59 (4):909–34.Google Scholar
Klarman, Michael. 2012. From the Closet to the Altar: Courts, Backlash and the Struggle for Same-Sex Marriage. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kochenov, Dimitry. 2007. Democracy and Human Rights—Not for Gay People?: EU Eastern Enlargement and Its Impact on the Protection of the Rights of Sexual Minorities. Texas Wesleyan Law Review 13 (2):459–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumm, Mattias, and Comella, Ferreres. 2005. The Primacy Clause of the Constitutional Treaty and the Future of Constitutional Conflict in the European Union. International Journal of Constitutional Law 3 (2-3):473–92.Google Scholar
Lax, Jeffrey R., and Philips, Justin H.. 2009. Gay Rights in the States: Public Opinion and Policy Responsiveness. American Political Science Review 103 (3):367–86.Google Scholar
Lee, David S. 2008. Randomized Experiments from Non-Random Selection in US House Elections. Journal of Econometrics 142 (2):675–97.Google Scholar
Maduro, Miguel. 1998. We, the Court: The European Court of Justice and the European Economic Constitution. Oxford, UK: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Martin, Lisa. 2012. Against Compliance. In Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art, edited by Dunoff, Jeffrey and Pollack, Mark, 591–610. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meisner, Anja. 2001. Minderheiten in den Streitkräften: Homosexuelle in der Bundeswehr. Munich, Germany: GRIN Publishing.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Andrew. 2000. The Origins of International Human Rights Regimes: Democratic Delegation in Postwar Europe. International Organization 54 (2):217–52.Google Scholar
Naurath, Nicole. 2007. Perceived Acceptance of Homosexuals Differs around Globe. Gallup, 1 November. Available at ⟨http://www.gallup.com/poll/102478/Perceived-Acceptance-Homosexuals-Differs-Around-Globe.aspx#2⟩. Accessed 15 May 2012.Google Scholar
Open Society Institute. 2012. LGBTI Rights in Eastern Europe: Between Hope and Despair, 19 July. Available at ⟨http://www.soros.org/voices/lgbti-rights-eastern-europe-between-hope-and-despair⟩. Accessed 5 October 2012.Google Scholar
Popelier, Patricia, Van de Heyning, Catherine, and Van Nuffel, Piet, eds. 2011. Human Rights Protection in the European Legal Order: The Interaction Between the European and the National Courts. Cambridge, UK: Intersentia.Google Scholar
Shahabuddeen, Mohammed. 2007. Precedent in the World Court. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, Beth. 2009. Mobilizing for Human Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 1994. A Typology of Transjudicial Communication. University of Richmond Law Review. 29:99–138.Google Scholar
Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 2003. A Global Community of Courts. Harvard International Law Journal. 44:191–220.Google Scholar
Staton, Jeffrey K., and Moore, Will H.. 2011. Judicial Power in Domestic and International Politics. International Organization 65 (3):533–87.Google Scholar
Steinberg, Richard H. 2004. Judicial Lawmaking at the WTO: Discursive, Constitutional, and Political Constraints. American Journal of International Law 98 (2):247–75.Google Scholar
Tomz, Michael. 2008. Reputation and the Effect of International Law on Preferences and Beliefs. Working Paper. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Available at ⟨http://www.stanford.edu/~tomz/working/Tomz-IntlLaw-2008-02-11a.pdf⟩. Accessed 2 July 2012.Google Scholar
Voeten, Erik. 2007. The Politics of International Judicial Appointments: Evidence from the European Court of Human Rights. International Organization 61 (4):669–701.Google Scholar
Voeten, Erik. 2008. The Impartiality of International Judges: Evidence from the European Court of Human Rights. American Political Science Review 102 (4):417–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waaldijk, Kees. 2001. Towards the Recognition of Same-Sex Partners in European Union Law: Expectations Based on Trends in National Law. In Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Partnerships: A Study of National, European and International Law, edited by Wintemute, Robert and Andenaes, Mads, 635–51. Oxford, UK: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Waaldijk, Kees. 2009. Legal Recognition of Homosexual Orientation in the Countries of the World: A Chronological Overview with Footnotes. Paper presented at the International Lesbian and Gay Law Association's conference, The Global Arc of Justice—Sexual Orientation Law Around the World, March, Los Angeles, CA. Google Scholar
White, Robin C.A., and Ovey, Clare. 2010. Jacobs, White, and Ovey: The European Convention on Human Rights, 5th ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wildhaber, Luzius. 2000. Precedent in the European Court of Human Rights. In Protection des droits de l'homme: la perspective européenne, mélanges à la mémoire de Rolv Ryssdal, edited by Mahoney, Paul, Matscher, Franz, Petzold, Herbert, and Wildhaber, Luzius, 1529–45. Cologne, Germany: Carl Heymanns.Google Scholar
Wintemute, Robert. 1997. Sexual Orientation and Human Rights: The United States Constitution, the European Convention, and the Canadian Charter. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
World Bank. 2012. World Development Indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available at ⟨http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators⟩. Accessed 11 November 2012.Google Scholar
YouGov. 2011. Sunday Times Survey Results, 10–11 February. Available at ⟨http://cdn.yougov.com/today_uk_import/YG-Archives-Pol-ST-results-11-130211.pdf⟩. Accessed 4 May 2012.Google Scholar
Zaller, John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar