A traffic-light system of state arguments before the European Court of Human Rights

Despite an often-tense relationship between Contracting Parties and those who administer the ECHR, the atmosphere within the ECtHR remains relatively peaceful. I suggest that this harmony is the result of a traffic-light system of state arguments: ‘green’ for acceptable orthodox arguments, ‘amber’ for more dubious submissions and ‘red’ for contentions that exceed the parameters of appropriate conduct. Using Stanley Fish’s theory on interpretive communities, I contend that the determining factor behind the acceptability of an argument is the reaction that it receives from the other stakeholders within the Convention system. The harmony is therefore the product of an implicit system of internal regulation. Given the present global backlash against human rights, and ‘Strasbourg bashing’ more specifically, this is not something to be taken for granted.