The proportionality principle has become ever more important in European law and elsewhere. The career of the principle has attracted considerable attention from legal practitioners, legal theorists and political scientists alike, but the debate so far has been quite fragmented. In this new book the author offers a broad and systematic analysis of the proportionality principle. Discussing and comparing proportionality analysis as applied by European courts in part one of the book, the author proceeds to contrast proportionality analysis with alternative assessment schemes. In the third part of the book the author reaches beyond doctrinal reconstructions as he deciphers the functions of proportionality jurisprudence. In view of the various facets of proportionality analysis the author departs from the asserted infringement of a legally protected position by some regulatory act, proceeds to discuss the legitimacy of this intervention and undertakes an analysis of its suitability, appropriateness and necessity. According to the author, the safe grounds of proportionality means-ends rationality do not suffice where the legitimacy of an infringement has to be assessed, where conflicting values have to be “balanced” or where courts engage in a proportionality analysis “stricto sensu”. In the concluding remarks, the author proposes how proportionality analysis may be structured in order to better secure the legitimacy of the analysis.

The main objective of this study is to present a comparative legal analysis of proportionality. It provides a close examination of the key areas in which this principle has been applied, both at the national and supranational levels. The whole work is placed in the context of transformation of public law in the twentieth century. As many important general principles of law as applied by the Court of Justice have been borrowed from German and French law, a comparative study of the various forms which this principle has assumed in both German and French public law is presented. The book then offers an in-depth analysis of the application and impact of the principle of proportionality in EC law. The introduction and development of this principle by the Court of Justice represents one of the most striking examples of the interaction between the Community and national legal systems. It also illustrates the character of Community law as developed by the Court and the law-making function of the latter.

Proportionality analysis describes a particular legal technique of resolving conflicts between human rights or constitutional rights and public interests through a process of balancing. However, as a general tendency, the current vivid academic debate on proportionality pays insufficient attention to the institutional context - the question of judicial review. Based on the premise that proportionality analysis is a permissible approach to resolve conflicts between rights and other interests, this book lays out a strategy for courts and tribunals to deal with the challenge of using proportionality analysis in an adequate manner, taking into account their situation and context of judicial review. For this purpose, the book develops the concept of models of judicial review in a first theoretical chapter. These models are then applied to six comparative case studies in German and US constitutional law, the law of the European Convention on Human Rights, European Union law, World Trade Organization law, and international investment law. (Series: European Administrative Law - Vol. 8)

A comparative and empirical analysis of proportionality in the case law of six constitutional and supreme courts.

To speak of human rights in the twenty-first century is to speak of proportionality. Proportionality has been received into the constitutional doctrine of courts in continental Europe, the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, Israel, South Africa, and the United States, as well as the jurisprudence of treaty-based legal systems such as the European Convention on Human Rights. Proportionality provides a common analytical framework for resolving the great moral and political questions confronting political communities. But behind the singular appeal to proportionality lurks a range of different understandings. This volume brings together many of the world's leading constitutional theorists - proponents and critics of proportionality - to debate the merits of proportionality, the nature of rights, the practice of judicial review, and moral and legal reasoning. Their essays provide important new perspectives on this leading doctrine in human rights law.

1. Introduction 2. What is Proportionality? 3. Proportionality: A Multiplicity of Meanings 4. Proportionality in the Just War Tradition 5. Proportionality in International Humanitarian Law 6. Proportionality in Human Rights Law and Morality 7. The Uniqueness of Jus in Bello Proportionality 8. Countermeasures and Counterinsurgency 9. Human Shields and Risk 10. Targeted Killings and Proportionality in Law: Two Models 11. The Nature of War and the Idea of "Cyberwar" 12. Thresholds of Jus in Bello Proportionality Bibliography Index.

This book addresses the principle of proportionality, which is currently one of the most important instruments of judicial review, from both analytical and theory of law perspectives. As such, the analysis provided is far more comprehensive and can be applied to all areas of law, not just constitutional law. On the one hand, the volume offers a broad perspective on several aspects related to proportionality, such as its structure, the balancing methodology and the distinction between rules and principles. On the other, it provides an innovative, normativist and analytical approach to proportionality, helping readers understand its structure and behaviour.