IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v55y2025ip-_158.html

Leveling and Spotlighting: How the European Court of Justice Favors the Weak to Promote Its Legitimacy

Author

Listed:
  • Hermansen, Silje Synnøve Lyder
  • Pavone, Tommaso
  • Boulaziz, Louisa

Abstract

As private actors turn to international courts (ICs), we argue that judges can adopt pro-individual rights agendas to promote their own legitimacy. By leveling the odds for disempowered individuals and spotlighting their rights claims, ICs rebut charges that they are playthings of the powerful and cultivate support networks in civil society. We assess our theory by scrutinizing the first IC with private access: the European Court of Justice (ECJ). Established as an economic court and alleged to conceal a pro-business bias, we leverage original data demonstrating that the ECJ publicizes itself as protector of individuals and matches words with deeds. The ECJ ‘levels’, favoring individuals’ rights claims over claims raised by businesses boasting better legal teams. The ECJ then ‘spotlights’ pro-individual rights rulings via press releases that lawyers amplify in law journals. These findings challenge claims that ICs build legitimacy by stealth and the ‘haves’ come out ahead in litigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Hermansen, Silje Synnøve Lyder & Pavone, Tommaso & Boulaziz, Louisa, 2025. "Leveling and Spotlighting: How the European Court of Justice Favors the Weak to Promote Its Legitimacy," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55, pages 1-1, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:55:y:2025:i::p:-_158
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123425100987/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:55:y:2025:i::p:-_158. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.