Sustaining the Rule of Law

Jessica Greenberg offers a compelling, though at times jargon-ridden, analysis of the history of the European Court of Human Rights.

By Mark EllisFebruary 21, 2026

• Law

• Politics

• History

JESSICA GREENBERG’S NEW BOOK Justice in the Balance: Democracy, Rule of Law, and the European Court of Human Rights (2025) is a deeply rigorous and ambitious exploration of one of Europe’s most vital institutions, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), and its role in sustaining democratic principles and the rule of law across the continent. From the outset, this is not a casual read. Greenberg writes for a highly specialized, academic audience, employing dense theoretical language and drawing from a bibliography of nearly 300 sources. The book’s scope and rigor are impressive, but it demands patience and concentration even from seasoned scholars.

At times, Greenberg’s prose verges on impenetrable. Phrases like “cosmologies of worldmaking grounded in a willful commitment to generate enduring sociality out of the discursive materials of human interrelationships” exemplify the verbal mystification that may alienate some readers. Nevertheless, Greenberg’s insights are often profound. She explores how the court negotiates a “European consensus” that both reflects and shapes shared human rights standards. This consensus, she reminds the reader, transforms the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into a “living instrument,” one that evolves with shifting social and cultural norms across Europe.

Greenberg approaches this book from a distinctive ethnographic perspective, aiming to show that international human rights institutions are “epistemic communities” grounded in—but not limited to—their formal legal norms and goals. This anthropological lens may feel confusing. There is no denying, however, that it sets the book apart. Rather than offering a purely legal analysis, Greenberg focuses on the lived experiences, rhythms, and labor that animate the ECtHR’s daily work.

Greenberg’s background in anthropology and law enables her to bridge legal and cultural analysis, even if at times she seems more comfortable as an ethnographer than a legal scholar. Greenberg recognizes that, ultimately, the importance of international law lies in its impact on the lives of ordinary people. In writing the book, she looks almost exclusively through the eyes of individuals working within or around the court registry—lawyers, judges, strategic litigators, and their networks and relationships. Her research is based on years of fieldwork (2016–24), including over 100 interviews and extensive observation within the court’s ecosystem. She immerses the reader in the institutional culture, providing insight into the affective and procedural dynamics that shape how justice is produced.

Greenberg also rightly emphasizes that the ECtHR system faces an enduring challenge: enforcement. The court can issue binding judgments, but it lacks the power to compel compliance. Its effectiveness, therefore, depends on the moral and political will of states. This same issue is a concern for all regional, ad hoc, and international courts. Greenberg unfolds in detail how the ECtHR system relies heavily on diplomatic negotiations in the execution of judgments, and why this often requires backroom talks and closed-door power brokering.

One of the book’s strengths is its historical contextualization. Greenberg’s early chapters trace the post–World War II origins of the ECtHR, which established the court as the “crown jewel” of the Council of Europe’s legal framework. She details the ECtHR’s evolution, from its modest beginnings in the 1950s through its transformation during the 1970s and ’80s, when landmark decisions began to expand its authority. The post–Cold War period, particularly the accession of 25 new member states between 1990 and 2007, presented both opportunities and strains. The court’s caseload skyrocketed—from 859 judgments between 1959 and 1998 to over 20,000 between 1999 and 2020. Greenberg insightfully discusses how this expansion challenged the notion of shared European cultural and legal values.

Greenberg’s treatment of the Brexit debate is brief but compelling. The United Kingdom has had a tumultuous relationship with the ECtHR, characterized by frequent accusations of overreach and threats of withdrawal from the ECHR. While the court has never been a part of the EU system, this did not stop the British “Leave” campaign from using the court as emblematic of foreign interference. Over the span of 15 years, the percentage of the British public that perceived the ECtHR as a positive force sank from 71 percent in 1996 to 19 percent in 2011. UK politicians continue to disparage the court. This episode highlights the enduring tension between national sovereignty and supranational legal authority, a theme running throughout Justice in the Balance.

Greenberg’s discussion of the “rule of law” is among the book’s most engaging. She examines competing definitions of the concept and highlights the work of the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission, which famously concluded that the rule of law is difficult to define and that there is no single definition. Part of the reason, in my opinion, is the fact that the very meaning of the rule of law possesses a certain inherent elasticity. This elasticity poses a challenge for the international community, however, as it allows the definition of the rule of law, particularly when it is viewed as a purely formalistic concept, to be shaped and manipulated to serve various political agendas. It has been said that the beauty and strength of the rule of law lie in its inherent neutrality. No one—not the human rights community, not the business community, not even authoritarian governments—objects to it. And yet, despite this widespread acceptance, no single political idea has been so widely endorsed and simultaneously so vigorously contested. Greenberg’s treatment of this philosophical ambiguity is nuanced and reflective, showing how legal ideals can unify yet frustrate attempts at universal application.

Greenberg’s analysis of “managerial efficiency” and “consistency as a communicative modality,” however, returns the reader to a more sluggish critique; the discussion feels overly abstract and detached. These sections will likely test the patience of readers looking for clear connections to justice or human rights outcomes. Still, she offers valuable reflections on the court’s internal logic, where consistency sometimes trumps substantive justice.

By contrast, Greenberg’s chapter examining strategic litigation, especially by nongovernmental organizations such as the Open Society Justice Initiative, is extremely strong. Through interviews with leading litigators, Greenberg perceptively elaborates how targeted cases can advance systemic reform and reinforce the ECtHR’s legitimacy. Her discussion of anti-Roma racial discrimination cases is among the book’s most powerful, illustrating how the court serves as a platform for marginalized voices. It is here that Greenberg skillfully explains the efforts needed to move the court to adjudicate discrimination cases, and she brings to life the enormous diplomatic and advocacy efforts required to implement a judgment on structural racism.

In her concluding chapter, Greenberg turns to Russia’s expulsion from the Council of Europe—a moment that encapsulates the fragility of the European human rights project. Her discussion of Russia’s failed integration into the ECtHR system is one of the most accessible and poignant parts of the book. Here, her prose relaxes, her analysis sharpens, and the stakes of her argument become clear: the survival of human rights in Europe depends not only on law but also on the shared political will to uphold them.

Justice in the Balance is an impressive and original contribution to scholarship on international law and human rights. Its approach offers unique perspectives on the ECtHR’s institutional culture, even when the dense theoretical language at times limits accessibility. The book illuminates the paradox at the heart of the European project: that democracy and law coexist in tension, sustained as much by belief as by legal obligation. For readers seeking a deep, reflective, and intellectually demanding study of the ECtHR, Greenberg’s work will deliver. For those looking for a more accessible introduction to European human rights law, it may prove a formidable challenge, but one well worth the effort.