Reforming to Please: A Comprehensive Explanation for Non-Exit from the European Court of Human Rights

Abstract

States' growing dissatisfaction with the performance of the European Court of Human Rights - Governments' commitment to reform process - Threats of exit that failed to materialise - Adaptation of Hirschman's exit-voice-loyalty framework to explain states' non-exit from the European Court of Human Rights - Sufficiently effective voice, manifestations of loyalty, and high costs of exit as possible reasons behind non-exit - Governments' inability to achieve change in the Court's practice unilaterally - Divergent perceptions and expectations of governments - Court's responsiveness to governments' concerns - Showing the importance of cautious, incremental changes to accommodate diverse governmental expectations on the role of the European Court of Human Rights.