Balancing may be everywhere, but the proportionality test is not

The relationship between balancing and proportionality has not always been clear. Because part of the literature falls short of adequately differentiating between the two tools, many people have become conditioned to see an instance of proportionality whenever the word ‘balancing’ is dropped. As a c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Global constitutionalism 2024-11, Vol.13 (3), p.519-534
Main Author: da Silva, Virgílio Afonso
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The relationship between balancing and proportionality has not always been clear. Because part of the literature falls short of adequately differentiating between the two tools, many people have become conditioned to see an instance of proportionality whenever the word ‘balancing’ is dropped. As a consequence, the ubiquity of balancing brought about the feeling that proportionality is equally ubiquitous. In this article, I show that the proportionality test is necessarily linked to judicial review and how this link is key to understanding why not every instance of balancing is part of the proportionality test and that proportionality cannot be as ubiquitous as many have claimed. This has not only analytical relevance, but also institutional consequences.
ISSN:2045-3817
2045-3825
DOI:10.1017/S2045381723000187