ABSTRACT
The chapter is first of three empirical chapters studying the application of the judicial treatment concept on three Czech apex courts. It provides an analysis of the Supreme Court, the old post-communist court largely untouched by the transition. The chapter first engages with general patterns in references to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law and their development over time. It analyzes changes in the historically negative stance of the Supreme Court towards international human rights law. It seeks to explain changes in citation patterns by looking at legal, institutional, and personnel development in the judiciary. Second, the chapter proceeds with a meso-level analysis and asks how and why the Supreme Court refers to the ECtHR’s decisions. It explores the significance of ECtHR case law references for the Supreme Court’s reasoning and the legal techniques employed. It argues that the Supreme Court slowly shifted its position towards the ECtHR due to external pushes: The role of other domestic actors and new judges joining the board. While in the past its use of the case law was arbitrary and selective, nowadays it is moving to the position of active complier. Finally, the micro level analyzes two controversial areas of human rights protection, immaterial damages and the ne bis in idem principle, and discusses their evolvement under the ECtHR’s influence.
