About The Workshop
|
SW 28-Proportionality in Human Rights Adjudication. Challenges in the Changing Legal Landscape Convenors: Filip Horák, Katarzyna Žák Krzyžanková, Pavel Ondřejek, Tomáš Koref Contact: proportionality.ivr2026@gmail.com
|
|
| Today, the proportionality test is both a central theme in legal and constitutional theory and a common method courts across the world use to assess human rights interferences. The proper application of all its three components, namely (1) suitability (whether if the state’s action is suitable to achieve a permissible purpose, including assessing its permissibility), (2) necessity (whether there is a less restrictive but equally effective alternative to achieve the purpose), and (3) proportionality stricto sensu (whether the benefits of achieving the purpose outweigh the costs to the affected rights), is crucial for ensuring sufficient, predictable, and equal protection of rights for every individual in a democratic society.
For more than two decades, legal and constitutional theorists all around the world have been engaged in lively debates about the adequacy of using this test, either defending it or pointing to a number of problems with its application. For instance, several works address the issue of rationality and objectivity when balancing individual rights and public interests. Some authors highlight the danger of unconstrained judicial decision-making, whereby judges may use proportionality analysis to hide their true motivations for particular outcome of a case.
Some issues concerning proportionality remain largely unexplored. For example, it is striking that the current doctrine and case law often omit the first component of proportionality analysis, which shapes the entire test by identifying the authorities’ reasons and excluding the impermissible ones from further assessment. Other under-researched areas include the lack of empirical research on the use of the proportionality test, the unresolved relationship with traditional methods of legal reasoning or the understudied distinction between the questions of facts and questions of law throughout the proportionality test.
This workshop will explore various challenges concerning proportionality in human rights adjudication in the face of the changing legal landscape of today’s world. Our primary goal is to focus on particular causes and manifestations of problems in the application of proportionality in human rights adjudication. The topics of the papers presented in the workshop might include, for example: • methods of identifying legitimate and illegitimate purposes and means of legal regulation; • various types of excluded reasons (reasons that cannot be legitimately pursued by the primary decision-maker in states governed by the rule of law); • challenges of conducting empirical and comparative analyses of the doctrine and case-law involving proportionality; • the role of facts, expertise, and the burden of proof in proportionality reasoning; • more specific topics addressing contemporary problems, such as the use of proportionality in the current polycrisis or in societies characterised by the rise of populism and democratic backsliding; • or related topics.
We invite scholars from the fields of legal theory, legal philosophy, constitutional law, sociology and related disciplines to submit abstracts of their paper proposals that address these or similar topics. The workshop welcomes research from all legal traditions and jurisdictions as it strives for inclusiveness.
The deadline for submitting paper abstracts is 31 May 2026. Please send the abstract of approximately 300 words in PDF format via e-mail to the organizers of the special workshop (proportionality.ivr2026@ Abstracts will be evaluated based on following criteria: ● novelty and originality ● relevance to workshop theme ● impact ● clarity Participants will be notified by 7 June 2026, and selected participants will be requested to send their papers in advance.
|
|
| Organiser(s) | Filip Horák, Department of Constitutional Law, Faculty of Law, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic,
Katarzyna Žák Krzyžanková, Department of Legal Theory and Jurisprudence, Faculty of Law, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic, Tomáš Koref, Department of Legal Theory and Jurisprudence, Faculty of Law, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
|
| Keywords | Proportionality Principle, Human Rights, Legitimacy, Judicial Reasoning, Excluded Reasons
|
| Number of Sessions
(1 session = ca. 2 hours) |
2 sessions in 1 day (approx. 8 participants) – ideally Monday 29 June 2026 or Tuesday 30 June 2026 |
*
