Anti-Democratic Associations
Content and Consequences in Article 11 Adjudication
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12189117 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Stefan Sottiaux (0000-0002-6455-4796, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2004 |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 585-599 |
| Publication date | 2004-12-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0924-0519 • E-ISSN: 2214-7357 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/016934410402200404 |
| OpenAlex | W2526477043 |
| Language | EN |
This article wishes to address the position of anti-democratic political parties under Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. More precisely, it offers an analysis of Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) and others vs Turkey, a case in which the European Court of Human Right developed a full-scale test for assessing far-reaching interference with the right to freedom of association of political parties. It seeks to set the Refah ruling in the context of the Convention organ's freedom of expression case-law. The central claim is that the Refah Court adopted a standard which is both content and consequences-based. As a result, the Court's Article 11 adjudication bears resemblance to the United States Supreme Court's First Amendment jurisprudence. The article concludes that such a partially ‘American’ approach is justified with regard to the Convention rights of anti-democratic parties
Adjudication · Constitution · Constitutional court · Context (archaeology · Convention · Democracy · European union · Human rights · Jurisprudence · Political science · Politics · Supreme court · European and International Law Studies · International Law and Human Rights · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law
| Highly cited | No |
|---|