Arai-Takahashi, Y. (2002). The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine and the Principle of

• Proportionality in the Jurisprudence of the ECHR. Cambridge: Intersentia

Arai-Takahashi, Y. (2013). The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine: A Theoretical

• Analysis of Strasbourg’s Variable Geometry. In: Andreas Follesdal, Birgit Peters, & Geir Ulfstein (Eds.), Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a National, European and Global Context (2nd ed., p. 62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Arato, J. (2013). The Margin of Appreciation in International Investment Law.

• Virginia Journal of International Law, 545. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2319559.

Arnardottir, O. M. (2014). The Differences that Make a Difference: Recent

• Developments on the Discrimination Grounds and the Margin of Appreciation under Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Human Rights Law Review, 14(4), 647. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngu025.

Bakircioglu, O. (2007). The Application of the Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in

• Freedom of Expression and Public Morality Cases. German Law Journal, 8(7), 711. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200005885.

Bantekas, I., & Oette, L. (2020). International Human Rights Law and Practice (3rd

• ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Beaman, L. G. (2015). The Burqa Affair across Europe: Between Public and Private

• Space. Journal of Contemporary Religion, 30(1), 168. https://doi.org/10.1080/13537903.2015.987008.

Bernhardt, R. (1999). Evolutive Treaty Interpretation, Especially of the European

• Convention on Human Rights. German Yearbook of International Law, 42, 11.

Bjorge, E. (2015). Been There, Done That: The Margin of Appreciation and

• International Law. Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law, 4(1), 181. https://doi.org/10.7574/cjicl.04.01.181.

Bratza, N. (2014). Living Instrument or Dead Letter — The Future of the European

• Convention on Human Rights. European Human Rights Law Review, 1(2), 116.

Brems E. (2001). Human rights: Universality and Diversity. Leiden: Martinus

• Nijhoff Publishers.

Brems, E., & Gerards, J. (Eds.) (2013). Shaping Rights in the ECHR. Cambridge:

• Cambridge University Press.

Briggs, H. W. (1979). United States Ratification of the Vienna Treaty Convention.

• American Journal of International Law, 73(3), 470. https://doi.org/10.2307/2201147.

Christofferson, J. (2009). Fair Balance: Proportionality, Subsidiarity and Primarity

• in the ECHR. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cot, J. P. (2013). Margin of Appreciation. In: R. Wolfrum (Ed.), Max Planck

• Encyclopaedia of Public International Law, 6, 1012.

Council of Europe (n.d.). 46 Member States.  Retrieved from

• https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/46-members-states [access 4 January 2024]

Cullen, H. (2009). The Collective Complaints System of the European Social

• Charter: Interpretative Methods of the European Committee of Social Rights. Human Rights Law Review, 9(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngn042.

Dzehtsiarou, K. (2011). European Consensus and the Evolutive Interpretation of

• the European Convention on Human Rights. German Law Journal, 12(10), 1730. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200017533.

Endicott, T. (2014). Proportionality and Incommensurability. In: G Huscroft (Ed.),

• Proportionality and the Rule of Law: Rights, Justification, Reasoning (p. 311). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

George, L. (2018). The Margin of Appreciation Revisited: A Response to Follesdal.

• In: Adam Etinson (Ed.), Human Rights: Moral or Political? (pp. 295–310). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Greer, S.. (2010). The Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights:

• Universal Principle or Margin or Appreciation. UCL Human Rights Review, 3, 1.

Hamilton, F. (2013). Why the Margin of Appreciation Is Not the Answer to the Gay

• Marriage Debate. European Human Rights Law Review, 47.

Jackson, J. (2006). Broniowski v Poland: A Recipe for Increased Legitimacy of the

• European Court of Human Rights as a Supranational Constitutional Court. Connel Law Review, 39, 759.

Jacobs, F. G. (1969). Varieties of Approach to Treaty Interpretation: With Special

• Reference to the Draft Convention on the Law of Treaties before the Vienna Diplomatic Conference. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 18, 318.

Klabbers, J. (2021). International Law (3rd ed., p. 1). Cambridge:

• Cambridge University Press.

Kratochvíl, J. (2011). The Inflation of the Margin of Appreciation by the European

• Court of Human Rights. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 29(3), 324. https://doi.org/10.1177/016934411102900304.

Lauterpacht, H. (1949). Restrictive Interpretation and the Principle of Effectiveness

• in the Interpretation of Treaties, 26, 48. British Yearbook of International Law.

Lavrysen, L. (2018). System of Restrictions. In: Pieter Van Dijk, Fried Van Hoof,

• Arjen Van Rijn, & Leo Zwaak (Eds.), Theory and Practice of the European Convention on Human Rights (5th ed., p. 307). Cambridge: Intersentia.

Legg, A. (2012). The Margin of Appreciation in International Human Rights Law

• Deference and Proportionality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mahoney, P. (1990). Judicial Activism and Self-Restraint in the European Court of

• Human Rights: Two Sides of the Same Coin. Human Rights Law Review, 11, 57.

Marshall, J. (2015). S.A.S. v France: Burqa Bans and the Control or Empowerment

• of Identities. Human Rights Law Review, 15(2), 377–389. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngv003.

McNair, A. D. (1961). The Law of Treaties. UK: Clarendon Press.

Orakhelashvili, A. (2003). Restrictive Interpretation of Human Rights Treaties in

• the Recent Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. European Journal of International Law, 14(3), 529. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/14.3.529.

Popelier, P., & Van De Heyning, C. (2013). Procedural Rationality: Giving Teeth to

• the Proportionality Analysis. European Constitutional Law Review, 9(2), 230. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019612001137.

Popovic, D. (2009). Prevailing of Judicial Activism Over Self-Restraint in the

• jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. Creighton Law Review, 42, 372.

Rogoff, M. A. (1996). Interpretation of International Agreements by Domestic

• Courts and the Politics of International Treaty Relations: Reflections on Some Recent Decisions of the United States Supreme Court. American University Journal of International Law and Policy, 11(4), 559.

Shany, Y. (2005). Toward a General Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in

• International Law? European Journal of International Law, 16(5), 907. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chi149.

Sinclair, I. M., & Sinclair, I. R. (1984). The Vienna Convention on the Law of

• Treaties (2nd ed.). Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.

Skinner, S. (2014). Deference, Proportionality and the Margin of Appreciation in

• Lethal Force Cases under Article 2 ECHR. European Human Rights Law Review, 32.

Spielmann, D. (2012). Allowing the Right Margin: The European Court of Human

• Rights and the National Margin of Appreciation Doctrine: Waiver or Subsidiarity of European Review? Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 14, 381. https://doi.org/10.5235/152888712805580570.

Spiermann, O. (2017). The Oxford Handbook on The Sources of International Law

• (Samantha Besson & Jean D’Aspremont, Eds.; 1st ed., p. 165). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

The European Convention on Human Rights (n.d.). The Convention in

• 1950.Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/human-rights-convention/the-convention-in-1950 [accessed on 4 January 2024].

Tripkovic, B. (2022). A New Philosophy for the Margin of Appreciation and

• European Consensus. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 42(1), 207–234. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqab031.

Tsakyrakis, S. (2009). Proportionality: An assault on human rights? International

• Journal of Constitutional Law, 7(3), 468. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mop011.

UNHCR (2005). General Comment No. 16: The Equal Right of Men and Women to

• the Enjoyment of All Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Art. 3 of the Covenant). Refworld. Retrieved from https://www.refworld.org/docid/43f3067ae.html.

United Nations (n.d.-a). Member States. United Nations, New York. Retrieved from

• https://www.un.org/en/about-us/member-states {accessed on 4 January 2024].

United Nations (n.d.-b). Preparatory Years: UN Charter History. United Nations,

• New York. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/about-us/history-of-the-un/preparatory-years [accessed on 4 January 2024].

Watts, A., Pronto, A., & Wood, M. C. (1999). The International Law Commission,

• 1949-1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 687.

Watts, A., Pronto, A., & Wood, M. C. (1999). The International Law Commission,

• 1949-1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wessel, J. (2004). Relational Contract Theory and Treaty Interpretation: End-Game

• Treaties v. Dynamic Obligations. Annual Survey of American Law, 60, 149.