The Constitutional Structure of Proportionality

203 Pages·2012·1.052 MB·English

by  Matthias Klatt, Moritz Meister

THE CONSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE OF
PROPORTIONALITY
This page intentionally left blank
The Constitutional
Structure of
Proportionality
MATTHIAS KLATT AND
MORITZ MEISTER
1
3
GreatClarendonStreet,Oxfordox26dp,
UnitedKingdom
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford.
ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship,
andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof
OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries
#M.Klatt&M.Meister,2012
Themoralrightsoftheauthorshavebeenasserted
FirstEditionpublished2012
Impression:1
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin
aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe
priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted
bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics
rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe
aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe
addressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform
andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer
CrowncopyrightmaterialisreproducedunderClassLicence
NumberC01P0000148withthepermissionofOPSI
andtheQueen’sPrinterforScotland
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData
Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationData
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2012939889
ISBN 978–0–19–966246–3
PrintedinGreatBritainby
CPIGroup(UK)Ltd,CroydonCR04YY
LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand
forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials
containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork.
Acknowledgements
Theorigins ofthis bookarefound inaseries of researchsessions devotedto
various problems that arise in connection with the proportionality test,
sessions that took place in the course of work on, and supervision of, a
doctoral thesis. As happens when scholars set upon a collaborative project,
ourmutualinterestinthesubjectgrewovertime,lendingtoourworkricher
and more complex dimensions. The present volume is the outcome of this
process.
Someofthechaptersarebasedonotherpublicationsbyus.Wewouldlike
toacknowledgethosepublicationsandthepermissionstousethismaterialin
thisbook.Partsofchapters2,3,4,and7aretoappearas‘Proportionality—A
Benefit to Human Rights? Remarks on the ICon Controversy’ in the Inter-
nationalJournalofConstitutionalLaw(2012).Anearlierversionofchapter5
was published as M Klatt, ‘Positive Obligations under the European Con-
ventiononHumanRights’,HeidelbergJournalofInternationalLaw(2011),
691–718. An earlier version of chapter 6 was published as M Klatt and
JSchmidt,‘EpistemicDiscretioninConstitutionalLaw’intheInternational
Journal of Constitutional Law (2012), pp. 69–101.
Matthias Klatt
Moritz Meister
Hamburg
May 2012
This page intentionally left blank
Contents
ListofTables ix
ListofCases xi
ListofFormulae xiii
ListofVariables xv
Introduction 1
1. TheStructureoftheProportionalityTest 7
I. Thefourproportionalityrules 8
II. Theweightformula 10
2. Rights,Interests,andTrumps 15
I. Interestmodel 16
II. Strongtrumpmodel 17
III. Mediumtrumpmodel 22
IV. Weaktrumpmodel 23
V. Results 44
3. TheMethodofBalancing 45
I. Definitionalgenerosity 45
II. Ruleoflaw 49
III. Theimpactofmoralsonbalancing 51
IV. Balancingascalculation 57
V. Incommensurability 58
VI. Inviolablecorecontent 66
VII. Correctnessandadequateness 68
VIII. Overemphasisofbalancing 70
IX. Results 72
4. DiscretionandDeference 75
I. Structuraldiscretion 79
II. Epistemicdiscretion 80
III. Results 84
viii Contents
5. PositiveRightsandProportionalityAnalysis 85
I. Introduction 85
II. Negativerightsandtheproportionalitytest 90
III. Positiverightsandtheproportionalitytest 94
IV. Positiverightsandthemarginofappreciation 101
V. Results 108
6. EpistemicReliabilitiesinProportionalityAnalysis 109
I. Introduction 109
II. Balancingandprinciplestheory 110
III. Empiricalepistemicdiscretion 111
IV. Normativeepistemicdiscretion 123
V. Epistemicdiscretionandjudicialreview 135
VI. Results 147
7. CaseAnalysis:Otto-Preminger-InstitutvAustria 149
I. Thejudgment 150
II. Proportionalityapplied 153
III. Results 165
8. Results 167
Bibliography 173
IndexofNames 181
IndexofSubjects 182
List of Tables
Table5.1 Degreeofprotectionandintensityofinterference 96
Table5.2 Linesofvalueswithbothintensitiesofinterference 97
Table5.3 Fourlinesofvalues 99
Table5.4 Necessitytest(modifiedconstellation) 100
Table7.1 Linesofvalueswithbothintensitiesofinterference 163