A Critique of Proportionality and Balancing

The principle of proportionality, which has become the standard test for adjudicating human and constitutional rights disputes in jurisdictions worldwide has had few critics. Proportionality is generally taken for granted or enthusiastically promoted or accepted with minor qualifications. A Critique of Proportionality and Balancing presents a frontal challenge to this orthodoxy. It provides a comprehensive critique of the proportionality principle, and particularly of its most characteristic component, balancing. Divided into three parts, the book presents arguments against the proportionality test, critiques the view of rights entailed by it, and proposes an alternative understanding of fundamental rights and their limits.

• A comprehensive critique of the proportionality test aimed at academics working in human rights and constitutional law
• Proposes an alternative to current and prevalent understandings of human rights, appealing to critics of current developments in human rights law from both a legal and political perspective
• The book's argument applies to a great range of jurisdictions and will serve as a point of reference for those writing on proportionality