Sovereign debt and austerity strategies: Voice of the European Court of Human Rights

The global economy undergoes systemic and performance fragilities in close feedback loops with high sovereign debt levels. Socio-economic trajectories and international stability are perceived at stake. Dominating sovereign debt and austerity strategies constrict policy spaces and fuel clashes amongst social groups at national and international levels. These circumstances are at an unprecedented level since the Second World War and make it very difficult for most countries to provide a sustainable system of economic growth that would benefit the whole society rather than cause deeper levels of inequality. Moreover, policymaking that imparts appeasing system sustainability in conceptions of human rights is in traverse. Do prevailing economic strategies impact human rights and how? Which trajectories are elicited? To which interaction with the judicialization of human rights? To address these questions, the paper analyzes policy making-intended austerity jurisprudence (the “Austerity measures” factsheet) of the European Court of Human Rights (the ECtHR, the Court). Through case data standardization and review of the rulings in complement with doctrinal analysis, the paper first establishes the prevalence of the “margin of appreciation” doctrine (theory) on the voice of the jurisprudence and its discourse implications. Second, it contrasts the findings with the expectations of legal scholars of human rights. Third, the paper questions drivers for the doctrinal preferences of the Court, which other approaches may be at the Court’s disposal and how structurally plausible they may be. To conclude, the paper highlights potential juxtapositions on the doctrinal approach of the Court and its role in the governance of human rights. The paper contributes to the growing legal-economic literature on the interaction of sovereign debt and austerity strategies and legal human rights regimes.