Towards Separate Opinions at the Court of Justice of the European Union: Lessons in Deliberative Democracy from the International Court of Justice and Elsewhere. / Yuratich, David.

The Future of International Courts. ed. / Avidan Kent; Nikos Skoutaris; Jaime Trinidad. Routledge, 2018.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Forthcoming

Standard

Towards Separate Opinions at the Court of Justice of the European Union: Lessons in Deliberative Democracy from the International Court of Justice and Elsewhere. / Yuratich, David.

The Future of International Courts. ed. / Avidan Kent; Nikos Skoutaris; Jaime Trinidad. Routledge, 2018.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Harvard

APA

Yuratich, D. (Accepted/In press). Towards Separate Opinions at the Court of Justice of the European Union: Lessons in Deliberative Democracy from the International Court of Justice and Elsewhere. In A. Kent, N. Skoutaris, & J. Trinidad (Eds.), The Future of International Courts Routledge.

Vancouver

Author

BibTeX

@inbook{7daaeb7ec669490a8cd511b85605bf66,
title = "Towards Separate Opinions at the Court of Justice of the European Union: Lessons in Deliberative Democracy from the International Court of Justice and Elsewhere",
abstract = "The Eurozone crisis precipitated a shift towards intergovernmental forms of EU governance involving executive dominance and a reduced role for the European Parliament, and consequently spotlighted the EU{\textquoteright}s democratic legitimacy. It provoked prescriptions for a more deliberative EU whose citizens have more opportunities to effectively contest its direction. This chapter argues that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) could assist this if its judges were able to issue separate opinions. It draws on the International Court of Justice (ICJ), other international and domestic courts, and deliberative theory to demonstrate the democratic potential of such a reform. In sum, moving away from its current univocal format would encourage clearer and more discursive judgments which articulate different legal solutions and catalyse what H{\"u}bner Mendes calls 'post-decisional{\textquoteright} deliberation. ",
author = "David Yuratich",
year = "2018",
month = may,
day = "15",
language = "English",
editor = "Avidan Kent and Nikos Skoutaris and Jaime Trinidad",
booktitle = "The Future of International Courts",
publisher = "Routledge",

}

RIS

TY - CHAP

T1 - Towards Separate Opinions at the Court of Justice of the European Union: Lessons in Deliberative Democracy from the International Court of Justice and Elsewhere

AU - Yuratich, David

PY - 2018/5/15

Y1 - 2018/5/15

N2 - The Eurozone crisis precipitated a shift towards intergovernmental forms of EU governance involving executive dominance and a reduced role for the European Parliament, and consequently spotlighted the EU’s democratic legitimacy. It provoked prescriptions for a more deliberative EU whose citizens have more opportunities to effectively contest its direction. This chapter argues that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) could assist this if its judges were able to issue separate opinions. It draws on the International Court of Justice (ICJ), other international and domestic courts, and deliberative theory to demonstrate the democratic potential of such a reform. In sum, moving away from its current univocal format would encourage clearer and more discursive judgments which articulate different legal solutions and catalyse what Hübner Mendes calls 'post-decisional’ deliberation.

AB - The Eurozone crisis precipitated a shift towards intergovernmental forms of EU governance involving executive dominance and a reduced role for the European Parliament, and consequently spotlighted the EU’s democratic legitimacy. It provoked prescriptions for a more deliberative EU whose citizens have more opportunities to effectively contest its direction. This chapter argues that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) could assist this if its judges were able to issue separate opinions. It draws on the International Court of Justice (ICJ), other international and domestic courts, and deliberative theory to demonstrate the democratic potential of such a reform. In sum, moving away from its current univocal format would encourage clearer and more discursive judgments which articulate different legal solutions and catalyse what Hübner Mendes calls 'post-decisional’ deliberation.

M3 - Chapter

BT - The Future of International Courts

A2 - Kent, Avidan

A2 - Skoutaris, Nikos

A2 - Trinidad, Jaime

PB - Routledge

ER -