Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Judicial Independence and Impartiality

Tenure Changes at the European Court of Human Rights

Bibliographic Data

ID12197735
AuthorsHelga Molbæk-Steensig (0000-0002-7659-8737, European University Institute, corresponding author), Alexandre Quemy (0000-0002-5865-6403)
Year2023
Volume34
Issue3
Pages581-614
Publication date2023-08-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueEuropean Journal of International Law (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0938-5428 • E-ISSN: 1464-3596
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/ejil/chad036
OpenAlexW4386127438
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited6

Judges should be impartial and independent, judging based solely on the law. Current constitutional literature suggests an important factor in securing this may be the length of tenure. The assumption is that judges with non-renewable terms are more independent than judges with renewable terms since they do not have to worry about reappointment, but proving this assumption empirically is not straightforward. Obstacles include difficulties in comparing different courts and the fact that there is often no obvious case outcome that proves independence. This article aims to overcome these obstacles with a mixed-methods study on the European Court of Human Rights during a time when the tenure rules changed. The study goes beyond the counting of votes and analyses the arguments used in separate opinions as indicators of independence. Our main findings are that, after the introduction of non-renewable terms, judges write more opinions overall, and more of them criticize the judges’ appointing states, while fewer defend it. We also find that judges on non-renewable terms are on average more likely to write opinions addressing violations as systemic problems and to use their opinions to provide guidance for their appointing states on implementing judgments and improving human rights protection

Constitutional court · Human rights · Impartiality · Independence (probability theory · Judicial Independence · Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Statistics · European and International Law Studies · International Arbitration and Investment Law · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Mathematics · Law

  • Turning the Wheels of Justice

    Open Access•Ziqiao Wang, Wei Zhang et al.•Journal of Business Ethics•2026

  • (Republican) democracy and the European Court of Human Rights

    Open Access•CORMAC MAC AMHLAIGH•Global Constitutionalism•2026

  • The Role of Individual and Dissenting Opinions in International Adjudication

    Open Access•R P Anand•International and Comparative Law…•1965

  • Building legitimacy

    Silje Synnøve Lyder Hermansen•Journal of European Public Policy•2020

  • Strategy, Careers, and Judicial Decisions

    Aníbal Pérez-Liñán, Barry Ames et al.•The Journal of Politics•2006

  • The Dilemma of Dissent

    Open Access•Daniel Naurin, Øyvind Stiansen•Comparative Political Studies•2020

  • Judicial Selection and Death Penalty Decisions

    Open Access•Brandice Canes-Wrone, Tom S Clark et al.•American Political Science Review•2014

Citations per year2
Citation span2026 - 2026 (1)
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae