ICON S Conference 17 – 19 June 2016 Humboldt University Berlin

Article 8 ECHR. A violation in this type of cases, always
coincides with an incorrect or inconsistent application
of national rules or a good excuse for non-compliance.
These particular factors being of decisive importance,
inevitably renders the individual interests that are at
stake without self-standing significance.
89 GLOBAL CONSTITUTIONALISM AND
HUMAN RIGHTS
Recent years have witnessed a dramatic move towards
the globalization of constitutional law. Once considered
inherently local, constitutional law is now increasingly
conceived of in global and transnational terms. It is
perceived as a framework that is shared by different
nations and different constitutional courts and as
manifesting a universal conception of constitutionalism:
Global Constitutionalism. The study of Global
Constitutionalism has at least two interrelated focal
points. The first, as mentioned above is the study of the
phenomenon of constitutional law beyond the borders
of the state. This includes the study of the migration
of constitutional ideas, of practices of foreign law citation,
and of the prevalence and spread of particular
constitutional constructs, such as proportionality. The
other focal point is the study of the features and history
of a particular model of constitutional law, which has
developed in Europe after WWII, and of which Germany,
the European Court of Human Rights, Canada, and
South Africa are leading examples. This second focal
point also inevitably engages in a comparison with
the one leading model that is at odds with the Global
Model – the American model. What are the effects
of Global Constitutionalism on Human Rights? What
are the particular conceptions of human rights that
are embedded in the Global Model? How does the
global model of rights affect particular state models?
Does it have different effects on different rights? These
questions will be at the center of the panel on “Global
Constitutionalism and Human Rights”.
Participants Rosalind Dixon
Ran Hirschl
Moshe Cohen-Eliya
Gila Stopler
Mattias Kumm
Name of Chair Iddo Porat
Room UL9 213
Concurring panels 132
Rosalind Dixon: Proportionality & Comparative
Constitutional Practice
Concepts of proportionality have been developed
in most countries in a deeply comparative way, routinely
drawing on ideas developed across constitutional
borders. The application of doctrines of proportionality,
however, has often been far less comparative. The
article also proposes at least two ways in which courts
may usefully draw on comparative constitutional experience
to inform the application of proportionality doctrines:
first, by using comparative experience to test the
practical plausibility of alternative, less restrictive legislative
alternatives; and second, by providing courts
with a form of ‘transnational’ anchor, or check against
the dangers of both over- and under-enforcement, in
making judgments about the legitimacy of a govern-